lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Oct]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [15/17] SLUB: Support virtual fallback via SLAB_VFALLBACK
    On Sat, 29 Sep 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:

    > > atomic allocations. And with SLUB using higher order pages, atomic !0
    > > order allocations will be very very common.
    >
    > Oh OK.
    >
    > I thought we'd already fixed slub so that it didn't do that. Maybe that
    > fix is in -mm but I don't think so.
    >
    > Trying to do atomic order-1 allocations on behalf of arbitray slab caches
    > just won't fly - this is a significant degradation in kernel reliability,
    > as you've very easily demonstrated.

    Ummm... SLAB also does order 1 allocations. We have always done them.

    See mm/slab.c

    /*
    * Do not go above this order unless 0 objects fit into the slab.
    */
    #define BREAK_GFP_ORDER_HI 1
    #define BREAK_GFP_ORDER_LO 0
    static int slab_break_gfp_order = BREAK_GFP_ORDER_LO;

    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2007-10-01 22:57    [W:4.936 / U:1.144 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site