Re: [rfc] SLQB: YASA

["Pekka Enberg" <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>]

Hi Nick,

On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 09:57:25AM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > 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.

On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 11:13 AM, Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> wrote:
>  And also I guess I don't think Christoph would be very happy about
>  it :) He loves higher order allocations :)
>
>  The high level choices are pretty clear and I simply think there might
>  be a better way to do it. I'm not saying it *is* better because I simply
>  don't know, and there are areas where the tradeoffs I've made means that
>  in some situations SLQB cannot match SLUB.

So do you disagree with Christoph's statement that we should fix page
allocator performance instead of adding queues to SLUB? I also don't
think higher order allocations are the answer for regular boxes but I
can see why they're useful for HPC people with huge machines.

                                     Pekka