Re: 2.6.22 -mm merge plans: slub

[Andrew Morton]

On Wed, 2 May 2007 11:28:26 -0700 (PDT)
Christoph Lameter <clameter@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Wed, 2 May 2007, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 2 May 2007, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > > 
> > > But these are arch specific problems. We could use 
> > > ARCH_USES_SLAB_PAGE_STRUCT to disable SLUB on these platforms.
> > 
> > As a quick hack, sure.  But every ARCH_USES_SLAB_PAGE_STRUCT
> > diminishes the testing SLUB will get.  If the idea is that we're
> > going to support both SLAB and SLUB, some arches with one, some
> > with another, some with either, for more than a single release,
> > then I'm back to saying SLUB is being pushed in too early.
> > I can understand people wanting pluggable schedulers,
> > but pluggable slab allocators?
> 
> This is a sensitive piece of the kernel as you say and we better allow the 
> running of two allocator for some time to make sure that it behaves in all 
> load situations. The design is fundamentally different so its performance 
> characteristics may diverge significantly and perhaps there will be corner 
> cases for each where they do the best job.

eek.  We'd need to fix those corner cases then.  Our endgame
here really must be rm mm/slab.c.
-
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/