linux-kernel - [QUESTION] is SLAB considered legacy and deprecated?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20210927090347.GA2533@linux.asia-northeast3-a.c.our-ratio-313919.internal>
Date:   Mon, 27 Sep 2021 09:03:47 +0000
From:   Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@...il.com>
To:     linux-mm@...ck.org
Cc:     42.hyeyoo@...il.com, Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
        Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [QUESTION] is SLAB considered legacy and deprecated?

Hello there,

I've been working on adding 'lockless cache' on sl[au]b for a while.
But what it actually does is actually adding 'queuing' on slub.

So there is a fundamental question coming into my mind:
	'is SLAB considered legacy and deprecated?'

It seems there are little development on SLAB and people think that
SLAB is legacy and deprecated, so CONFIG_SLUB is used by default.

But I think both has pros and cons for their own:
	SLAB: more temporal locality (cache friendly)
	but high usage of memory, and less spatial locality (TLB misses) than SLUB.

	SLUB: less temporal locality (less cache friendly) than SLAB
	but more spatial locality (TLB hit), and low usage of memory
	and good debugging feature.

Why do people say SLAB is deprecated/legacy?

Thanks,
Hyeonggon