From: Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>
To: Pekka J Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] greatly reduce SLOB external fragmentation
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 09:44:17 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1199979858.5331.15.camel@cinder.waste.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0801101251200.14402@sbz-30.cs.Helsinki.FI>
On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 12:54 +0200, Pekka J Enberg wrote:
> Hi Matt,
>
> On Thu, 10 Jan 2008, Pekka J Enberg wrote:
> > I'll double check the results for SLUB next but it seems obvious that your
> > patches are a net gain for SLOB and should be applied. One problem though
> > with SLOB seems to be that its memory efficiency is not so stable. Any
> > ideas why that is?
We're seeing different numbers in each allocator indicating that the
ordering of allocations is not stable. When fragmentation occurs, it
magnifies the underlying instability. On my config, where the split list
combats fragmentation extremely effectively, the stability is quite
good.
Perhaps I'll add a printk to allocs and generate some size histograms.
lguest + grep = relayfs for dummies.
> Ok, I did that. The number are stable and reproducible. In fact, the
> average for SLUB is within 1 KB of the previous numbers. So, we have the
> same .config, the same userspace, and the same hypervisor, so what's the
> difference here?
I've got:
gcc version 4.2.3 20080102 (prerelease) (Debian 4.2.2-5)
BusyBox v1.2.1 (2006.11.01-11:21+0000) Built-in shell (ash)
--
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-01-10 15:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 69+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-01-02 18:43 [PATCH] procfs: provide slub's /proc/slabinfo Hugh Dickins
2008-01-02 18:53 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-01-02 19:09 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-01-02 19:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-01-02 19:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-01-02 19:49 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-01-02 22:50 ` Matt Mackall
2008-01-03 8:52 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-03 16:46 ` Matt Mackall
2008-01-04 2:21 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-01-04 2:45 ` Andi Kleen
2008-01-04 4:34 ` Matt Mackall
2008-01-04 9:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-01-04 20:37 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-01-04 4:11 ` Matt Mackall
2008-01-04 20:34 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-01-04 20:55 ` Matt Mackall
2008-01-04 21:36 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-01-04 22:30 ` Matt Mackall
2008-01-05 20:16 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-01-05 16:21 ` Pekka J Enberg
2008-01-05 17:14 ` Andi Kleen
2008-01-05 20:05 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-01-07 20:12 ` Pekka J Enberg
2008-01-06 17:51 ` Matt Mackall
2008-01-07 18:06 ` Pekka J Enberg
2008-01-07 19:03 ` Matt Mackall
2008-01-07 19:53 ` Pekka J Enberg
2008-01-07 20:44 ` Pekka J Enberg
2008-01-10 10:04 ` Pekka J Enberg
2008-01-09 19:15 ` [RFC PATCH] greatly reduce SLOB external fragmentation Matt Mackall
2008-01-09 22:43 ` Pekka J Enberg
2008-01-09 22:59 ` Matt Mackall
2008-01-10 10:02 ` Pekka J Enberg
2008-01-10 10:54 ` Pekka J Enberg
2008-01-10 15:44 ` Matt Mackall [this message]
2008-01-10 16:13 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-01-10 17:49 ` Matt Mackall
2008-01-10 18:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-01-10 18:42 ` Matt Mackall
2008-01-10 19:24 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-01-10 19:44 ` Matt Mackall
2008-01-10 19:51 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-01-10 19:41 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-01-10 19:46 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-01-10 19:53 ` Andi Kleen
2008-01-10 19:52 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-01-10 19:16 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-01-10 19:23 ` Matt Mackall
2008-01-10 19:31 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-01-10 21:25 ` Jörn Engel
2008-01-10 18:13 ` Andi Kleen
2008-07-30 21:51 ` Pekka J Enberg
2008-07-30 22:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-30 22:22 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-07-30 22:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-31 0:42 ` malc
2008-07-31 1:03 ` Matt Mackall
2008-07-31 1:09 ` Matt Mackall
2008-07-31 14:11 ` Andi Kleen
2008-07-31 15:25 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-07-31 16:03 ` Andi Kleen
2008-07-31 16:05 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-07-31 14:26 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-07-31 15:38 ` Matt Mackall
2008-07-31 15:42 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-01-10 2:46 ` Matt Mackall
2008-01-10 10:03 ` Pekka J Enberg
2008-01-03 20:31 ` [PATCH] procfs: provide slub's /proc/slabinfo Christoph Lameter
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1199979858.5331.15.camel@cinder.waste.org \
--to=mpm@selenic.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=clameter@sgi.com \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=penberg@cs.helsinki.fi \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome