From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1423638AbXEAVIy (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 May 2007 17:08:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1423643AbXEAVIx (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 May 2007 17:08:53 -0400 Received: from netops-testserver-4-out.sgi.com ([192.48.171.29]:40937 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1423638AbXEAVIw (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 May 2007 17:08:52 -0400 Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 14:08:50 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter X-X-Sender: clameter@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com To: Hugh Dickins cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: 2.6.22 -mm merge plans: slub In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20070430162007.ad46e153.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070501125559.9ab42896.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 1 May 2007, Hugh Dickins wrote: > Yes, to me it does. If it could be defaulted to on throughout the > -rcs, on every architecture, then I'd say that's "finishing work"; > and we'd be safe knowing we could go back to slab in a hurry if > needed. But it hasn't reached that stage yet, I think. Why would we need to go back to SLAB if we have not switched to SLUB? SLUB is marked experimental and not the default. The only problems that I am aware of is(or was) the issue with arches modifying page struct fields of slab pages that SLUB needs for its own operations. And I thought it was all fixed since the powerpc guys were quiet and the patch was in for i386.