[lkml]   [2010]   [Oct]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [UnifiedV4 00/16] The Unified slab allocator (V4)
    On 06/10/10 09:01, Pekka Enberg wrote:
    > (Adding more people who've taken interest in slab performance in the
    > past to CC.)
    > On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 9:57 PM, 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.
    >> The following is a release of an allocator based on SLAB
    >> and SLUB that integrates the best approaches from both allocators. The
    >> per cpu queuing is like in SLAB whereas much of the infrastructure
    >> comes from SLUB.
    >> After this patches SLUB will track the cpu cache contents
    >> like SLAB attemped to. There are a number of architectural differences:
    >> 1. SLUB accurately tracks cpu caches instead of assuming that there
    >> is only a single cpu cache per node or system.
    >> 2. SLUB object expiration is tied into the page reclaim logic. There
    >> is no periodic cache expiration.
    >> 3. SLUB caches are dynamically configurable via the sysfs filesystem.
    >> 4. There is no per slab page metadata structure to maintain (aside
    >> from the object bitmap that usually fits into the page struct).
    >> 5. Has all the resiliency and diagnostic features of SLUB.
    >> The unified allocator is a merging of SLUB with some queuing concepts from
    >> SLAB and a new way of managing objects in the slabs using bitmaps. Memory
    >> wise this is slightly more inefficient than SLUB (due to the need to place
    >> large bitmaps --sized a few words--in some slab pages if there are more
    >> than BITS_PER_LONG objects in a slab) but in general does not increase space
    >> use too much.
    >> The SLAB scheme of not touching the object during management is adopted.
    >> The unified allocator can efficiently free and allocate cache cold objects
    >> without causing cache misses.

    Hi Christoph,
    What tree are these patches against ? I'm getting patch failures on the
    main tree.


     \ /
      Last update: 2010-10-06 13:05    [W:0.036 / U:0.424 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site