Re: [13/18] x86_64: Allow fallback for the stack

On Thu, 4 Oct 2007, Andi Kleen wrote:

> > The order-1 allocation failures where GFP_ATOMIC, because SLUB uses !0
> > order for everything.
> 
> slub is wrong then. Can it be fixed?

SLUB in mm kernels was using higher order allocations for some slabs 
for the last 6 months or so. Not true for upstream.

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

---

• References:
  • [00/18] Virtual Compound Page Support V2
    • From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
  • Re: [13/18] x86_64: Allow fallback for the stack
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
  • Re: [13/18] x86_64: Allow fallback for the stack
    • From: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
  • Re: [13/18] x86_64: Allow fallback for the stack
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: SLUB performance regression vs SLAB
• Next by Date: Re: SLUB performance regression vs SLAB
• Previous by thread: Re: [13/18] x86_64: Allow fallback for the stack
• Next by thread: Re: [13/18] x86_64: Allow fallback for the stack
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]