Re: [PATCH] slob: reduce list scanning

[Nick Piggin]

Pekka Enberg wrote:
> On 7/16/07, Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Actually SLOB potentially has some fundamental CPU cache hotness
> > advantages over the other allocators, for the same reasons as
> > its space advantages.
>
>
> Because consecutive allocations hit the same cache-hot page regardless
> of requested size where as SLUB by definition distributes allocations
> to different pages (some of which may not be hot)?

Yeah, that, and also a newly freed slab object is quite likely to be
hot, and that memory can be used by another subsequent allocation --
not always, because the allocation heuristics may not place it there,
but there is potential that is impossible with slab allocators.

--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
-
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/