[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1203211255290.21932@router.home>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 12:56:50 -0500 (CDT)
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
cc: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: Patch workqueue: create new slab cache instead of hacking
On Wed, 21 Mar 2012, Tejun Heo wrote:
> I don't know. At this point, this is only for singlethread and
> unbound workqueues and we don't have too many of them left at this
> point. I'd like to avoid creating a slab cache for this. How about
> just leaving it be? If we develop other use cases for larger
> alignments, let's worry about implementing something common then.
We could write a function that identifies a compatible kmalloc cache
or creates a new one if necessary. That would cut down overhead similar to
what slub merge is doing but allows more control by the developer.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists