netdev - Re: 2.6.24-rc2: Network commit causes SLUB performance regression with tbench

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

Date:	Wed, 14 Nov 2007 10:33:54 -0800 (PST)
From:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
cc:	nickpiggin@...oo.com.au, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.24-rc2: Network commit causes SLUB performance regression
 with tbench

On Wed, 14 Nov 2007, David Miller wrote:

> > Still interested to know why SLAB didn't see the same thing...
> 
> Yes, I wonder why too.  I bet objects just got packed differently.

The objects are packed tightly in SLUB and SLUB can allocate smaller 
objects (minimum is 8 SLAB mininum is 32).

On free a SLUB object goes directly back to the slab where it came from. 
We have no queues in SLUB so we use the first word of the object as a 
freepointer. In SLAB the objects first go onto queues and then are drained 
later into the slab. On free in SLAB there is usually no need to touch the 
object itself. The object pointer is simply moved onto the queue (works 
well in SMP, in NUMA we have overhead identifying the queue and 
overhead due to the number of queues needed).

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html