Re: [Q] Default SLAB allocator

[JoonSoo Kim]

Hello, Eric.

2012/10/14 Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@xxxxxxxxx>:
> SLUB was really bad in the common workload you describe (allocations
> done by one cpu, freeing done by other cpus), because all kfree() hit
> the slow path and cpus contend in __slab_free() in the loop guarded by
> cmpxchg_double_slab(). SLAB has a cache for this, while SLUB directly
> hit the main "struct page" to add the freed object to freelist.

Could you elaborate more on how 'netperf RR' makes kernel "allocations
done by one cpu, freeling done by other cpus", please?
I don't have enough background network subsystem, so I'm just curious.

> I played some months ago adding a percpu associative cache to SLUB, then
> just moved on other strategy.
>
> (Idea for this per cpu cache was to build a temporary free list of
> objects to batch accesses to struct page)

Is this implemented and submitted?
If it is, could you tell me the link for the patches?

Thanks!
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/