Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 24 Nov 2009 23:16:08 +0200 | Subject | Re: lockdep complaints in slab allocator | From | Pekka Enberg <> |
| |
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 11:01 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote: >> If there's a proposal here, it's not clear what it is. > > Merge SLQB and rm mm/sl[ua]b.c include/linux/sl[ua]b.h for .33-rc1 > > As long as people have a choice they'll not even try new stuff and if > they do they'll change to the old one as soon as they find an issue, not > even bothering to report, let alone expend effort fixing it.
Oh, no, SLQB is by no means stable enough for the general public. And it doesn't even have all the functionality SLAB and SLUB does (cpusets come to mind).
If people want to really help us getting out of this mess, please take a stab at fixing any of the outstanding performance regressions for either SLQB or SLUB. David's a great source if you're interested in knowing where to look. The only big regression for SLUB is the Intel TPC benchmark thingy that nobody (except Intel folks) really has access to. SLQB doesn't suffer from that because Nick had some performance testing help from Intel IIRC.
| |