lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Sep]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: tbench regression - Why process scheduler has impact on tbench and why small per-cpu slab (SLUB) cache creates the scenario?
On Tue, 11 Sep 2007, Nick Piggin wrote:

> The impression I got at vm meeting was that SLUB was good to go :(

Its not? I have had Intel test this thoroughly and they assured me that it
is up to SLAB. This particular case is an synthetic tests for a PAGE_SIZE
alloc and SLUB was not optimized for that case because PAGE_SIZEd
allocations should be handled by the page allocators. Quicklists were
introduced for the explicit purpose to get these messy page sized cases
out of the slab allocators.

> But slab allocations don't really control the macro behaviour of a
> benchmark like that so much. So don't wait until something happens
> with the scheduler, fix it now.

Ok so you are for pushing in the page allocator pass through patch from mm
into rc6? Isnt it a bit late for such a change? I would think that 2.6.24
is early enough.
-
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: 2007-09-11 22:23    [W:2.012 / U:0.008 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site