From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762150AbYDCH5k (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Apr 2008 03:57:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1762029AbYDCH52 (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Apr 2008 03:57:28 -0400 Received: from ns.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:34476 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1762006AbYDCH50 (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Apr 2008 03:57:26 -0400 Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 09:57:25 +0200 From: Nick Piggin To: Pekka Enberg Cc: Linux Memory Management List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [rfc] SLQB: YASA Message-ID: <20080403075725.GA7514@wotan.suse.de> References: <20080403072550.GC25932@wotan.suse.de> <84144f020804030045p44456894lfc006dcdeab6f67c@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <84144f020804030045p44456894lfc006dcdeab6f67c@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 10:45:44AM +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote: > Hi Nick, > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 10:25 AM, Nick Piggin wrote: > > I'm not quite sure what to do with this. If anybody could test or comment, > > I guess that would be a good start :) > > Why is this not a patch set against SLUB? It's a completely different design of the core allocator algorithms really. It probably looks quite similar because I started with slub.c, but really is just the peripheral supporting code and structure. I'm never intending to try to go through the pain of incrementally changing SLUB into SLQB. If SLQB is found to be a good idea, then it could maybe get merged.