On Sat, 24 Feb 2007, Jörn Engel wrote: > How much of a gain is the merging anyway? Once you start having > explicit whitelists or blacklists of pools that can be merged, one can > start to wonder if the result is worth the effort. It eliminates 50% of the slab caches. Thus it reduces the management overhead by half.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: SLUB: The unqueued Slab allocator
- From: Jörn Engel <[email protected]>
- Re: SLUB: The unqueued Slab allocator
- References:
- Re: SLUB: The unqueued Slab allocator
- From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
- Re: SLUB: The unqueued Slab allocator
- From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <[email protected]>
- Re: SLUB: The unqueued Slab allocator
- From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
- Re: SLUB: The unqueued Slab allocator
- From: David Miller <[email protected]>
- Re: SLUB: The unqueued Slab allocator
- From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
- Re: SLUB: The unqueued Slab allocator
- From: Jörn Engel <[email protected]>
- Re: SLUB: The unqueued Slab allocator
- Prev by Date: Re: PREEMPT_RCU breaks anon_vma locking ?
- Next by Date: [PATCH] IPv6 anycast refcnt fix
- Previous by thread: Re: SLUB: The unqueued Slab allocator
- Next by thread: Re: SLUB: The unqueued Slab allocator
- Index(es):