mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Janboe Ye <yuan-bo.ye@motorola.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, vegard.nossum@gmail.com,
	fche@redhat.com, cl@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Check write to slab memory which freed already using mudflap
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 12:40:26 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1247218826.771.15.camel@penberg-laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090710092921.GF14666@wotan.suse.de>

Hi Nick,

On Fri, 2009-07-10 at 11:29 +0200, Nick Piggin wrote:
> What I would like to see is we eventualy make the hard decision
> and cull 2 of them. If SLQB is not clearly better (or, if it is
> clearly worse) than the other allocators and it can't be improved,
> then it has failed my goals for it and I would prefer to remove it
> from the tree.

I'm not sure it's such a hard decision. SLAB is on it's way out because
SLUB and SLQB code are much cleaner and the debugging support is better.
As for SLUB vs. SLQB, I'm hoping to trick you, Mel, and others into
doing an "epic slab allocator performance battle" and post the numbers
once we have have everything merged to mainline. My gut feeling is that
SLQB is in the lead because SLUB hasn't addressed the Intel regression.

			Pekka


  reply	other threads:[~2009-07-10  9:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-07-09 16:13 Janboe Ye
2009-07-09 16:44 ` Pekka Enberg
2009-07-09 19:40   ` Janboe Ye
2009-07-10  8:47   ` Ingo Molnar
2009-07-10  8:52     ` Pekka Enberg
2009-07-10  9:03       ` Nick Piggin
2009-07-10  9:14         ` Pekka Enberg
2009-07-10  9:29           ` Nick Piggin
2009-07-10  9:40             ` Pekka Enberg [this message]
2009-07-10  9:47               ` David Rientjes
2009-07-10  9:51                 ` Pekka Enberg
2009-07-10 10:03                   ` David Rientjes
2009-07-10 10:10                     ` Pekka Enberg
2009-07-10 10:30                       ` Nick Piggin
2009-07-15 14:59                     ` Nick Piggin
2009-07-15 20:19                       ` David Rientjes
2009-07-20  8:32                         ` Nick Piggin
2009-07-10  9:41             ` David Rientjes
2009-07-10  9:46               ` Pekka Enberg
2009-07-10  9:04     ` David Rientjes
2009-07-10  9:19       ` Nick Piggin
2009-07-10  9:19       ` Pekka Enberg
2009-07-10  9:31         ` David Rientjes
2009-07-10  9:38           ` Nick Piggin
2009-07-10 18:55             ` 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=1247218826.771.15.camel@penberg-laptop \
    --to=penberg@cs.helsinki.fi \
    --cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=fche@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=npiggin@suse.de \
    --cc=vegard.nossum@gmail.com \
    --cc=yuan-bo.ye@motorola.com \
    /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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®