Re: [PATCH] per-cpu slab

• Next message: Stephen C. Tweedie: "Re: dedicated logging devices"
• Previous message: LEN: "$B$($i$S$^$7$?!*("
• In reply to: Manfred Spraul: "[PATCH] per-cpu slab"
• Next in thread: Dave Jones: "Re: [PATCH] per-cpu slab"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Thu, Jun 08, 2000 at 08:22:18PM +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> I've virtually finished my per-cpu slab patch.
>
> http://colorfullife.com/~manfreds/slab/patch-slab-cpu-E

> I'm still interested in
>
> * which statistics should I collect about the per-cpu arrays?
> * which realistic benchmarks can I run with a 10 Mbit NE2000 network
> card :-/
> * ideas for further improvements.

Hi Manfred. Rereading the original paper, there was no problem in
Bonwick's implementation with having both a constructor and poisoning.
Simply:

on free:
        run destructor
        poison structure
on alloc:
        check poison
        run constructor

would you like to code this or shall i?

-- 
The Sex Pistols were revolutionaries.  The Bay City Rollers weren't.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

• Next message: Stephen C. Tweedie: "Re: dedicated logging devices"
• Previous message: LEN: "$B$($i$S$^$7$?!*("
• In reply to: Manfred Spraul: "[PATCH] per-cpu slab"
• Next in thread: Dave Jones: "Re: [PATCH] per-cpu slab"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jun 15 2000 - 21:00:16 EST