From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760230AbYDCIRk (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Apr 2008 04:17:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750971AbYDCIRY (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Apr 2008 04:17:24 -0400 Received: from fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.35]:47472 "EHLO fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750801AbYDCIRW (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Apr 2008 04:17:22 -0400 Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2008 17:17:39 +0900 From: KOSAKI Motohiro To: Nick Piggin Subject: Re: [rfc] SLQB: YASA Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, Pekka Enberg , Linux Memory Management List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Christoph Lameter In-Reply-To: <20080403075725.GA7514@wotan.suse.de> References: <84144f020804030045p44456894lfc006dcdeab6f67c@mail.gmail.com> <20080403075725.GA7514@wotan.suse.de> Message-Id: <20080403171626.0283.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Becky! ver. 2.42 [ja] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi > > 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. Do you have performance mesurement result? I hope see it if possible. Thanks! :)