lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Dec]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateThu, 13 Dec 2007 14:11:24 -0800 (PST)
FromChristoph Lameter <>
SubjectRe: Major regression on hackbench with SLUB
On Fri, 7 Dec 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> The biggest cost of __slab_alloc() in my profile is the "slab_lock()", but 
> that may not be the one that causes problems in a 64-cpu setup, so it 
> would be good to have that verified.

Hmmmm.. This would indicate lock contention on a slab.
> [ The whole node match thing is likely totally bogus. I suspect we pay 
>   *more* in trying to match nodes than we'd ever likely pay in just 
>   returning the wrong node for an allocation, but that's neither here nor 
>   there ]

Node match is necessary in order to make the allocator able to get memory 
for the node that the caller requested.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-12-13 23:15    [from the cache]
©2003-2008