lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Oct]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [UnifiedV4 00/16] The Unified slab allocator (V4)
On Tue, 5 Oct 2010, Christoph Lameter wrote:

> V3->V4:
> - Lots of debugging
> - Performance optimizations (more would be good)...
> - Drop per slab locking in favor of per node locking for
> partial lists (queuing implies freeing large amounts of objects
> to per node lists of slab).
> - Implement object expiration via reclaim VM logic.
>

I applied this set on top of Pekka's for-next tree reverted back to
5d1f57e4 since it doesn't apply later then that.

Overall, the results are _much_ better than the vanilla slub allocator
that I frequently saw ~20% regressions with the TCP_RR netperf benchmark
on a couple of my machines with larger cpu counts. However, there still
is a significant performance degradation compared to slab.

When running this patchset on two (client and server running
netperf-2.4.5) four 2.2GHz quad-core AMD processors with 64GB of memory,
here're the results:

threads SLAB SLUB diff
16 207038 184389 -10.9%
32 266105 234386 -11.9%
48 287989 252733 -12.2%
64 307572 277221 - 9.9%
80 309802 284199 - 8.3%
96 302959 291743 - 3.7%
112 307381 297459 - 3.2%
128 314582 299340 - 4.8%
144 331945 299648 - 9.7%
160 321882 314192 - 2.4%


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-10-19 22:43    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site