[lkml]   [2007]   [Feb]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: SLUB: The unqueued Slab allocator
    On Thu, 22 Feb 2007, Andi Kleen wrote:

    > > SLUB does not need a cache reaper for UP systems.
    > This means constructors/destructors are becomming worthless?
    > Can you describe your rationale why you think they don't make
    > sense on UP?

    Cache reaping has nothing to do with constructors and destructors. SLUB
    fully supports constructors and destructors.

    > > G. Slab merging
    > >
    > > We often have slab caches with similar parameters. SLUB detects those
    > > on bootup and merges them into the corresponding general caches. This
    > > leads to more effective memory use.
    > Did you do any tests on what that does to long term memory fragmentation?
    > It is against the "object of same type have similar livetime and should
    > be clustered together" theory at least.

    I have done no tests in that regard and we would have to assess the impact
    that the merging has to overall system behavior.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2007-02-22 19:45    [W:0.018 / U:71.876 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site