[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAAmzW4N1rAQLOE3QmeeTfsNH-7v-9RD8wT990RbZtYon3YfrLA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 09:03:58 +0900
From: JoonSoo Kim <js1304@...il.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Ezequiel Garcia <elezegarcia@...il.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Tim Bird <tim.bird@...sony.com>,
celinux-dev@...ts.celinuxforum.org
Subject: Re: [Q] Default SLAB allocator
Hello, Eric.
Thank you very much for a kind comment about my question.
I have one more question related to network subsystem.
Please let me know what I misunderstand.
2012/10/14 Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>:
> In latest kernels, skb->head no longer use kmalloc()/kfree(), so SLAB vs
> SLUB is less a concern for network loads.
>
> In 3.7, (commit 69b08f62e17) we use fragments of order-3 pages to
> populate skb->head.
You mentioned that in latest kernel skb->head no longer use kmalloc()/kfree().
But, why result of David's "netperf RR" test on v3.6 is differentiated
by choosing the allocator?
As far as I know, __netdev_alloc_frag may be introduced in v3.5, so
I'm just confused.
Does this test use __netdev_alloc_skb with "__GFP_WAIT | GFP_DMA"?
Does normal workload for network use __netdev_alloc_skb with
"__GFP_WAIT | GFP_DMA"?
Thanks!
--
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