On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 12:30:03PM +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> Hi Nick,
>
> On 1/25/06, Nick Piggin <[email protected]> wrote:
> > This is probably not worthwhile for most cases, but slab did strike me
> > as a potential candidate (however the complication here is that some
> > code I think uses the refcount of underlying pages of slab allocations
> > eg nommu code). So it is not a complete patch, but I wonder if anyone
> > thinks the savings might be worth the complexity?
> >
> > Is there any particular code that is really heavy on slab allocations?
> > That isn't mostly handled by the slab's internal freelists?
>
> I certainly hope not. For heavy users, the slab allocator should grow
> caches enough to satisfy most allocations from the them. Also, I think
I figured this would usually be the case.
> we want to keep the reference counting for slab pages so that we can
> use kmalloc'd memory in the block layer.
>
Does that happen now? Where is it needed (nbd or something I guess?)
Nick
-
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/
[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]
