Re: [patch 09/10] Remove the SLOB allocator for 2.6.23

[Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>]

Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Jul 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:

> I think the advantage that SLOB generates here is pretty minimal and is 
> easily offset by the problems of maintaining SLOB.

I don't get it. Have you got agreement from the small memory people
that the advantages of SLOB are pretty minimal, or did you just
decide that? If the latter, did you completely miss reading my email?
What happens to the people who jump through hoops to save 1 or 2 K?

I don't see any problems with maintaining SLOB. It is simple enough
that I was able to write a userspace test harness for it and hack
away at it after reading the code the first time for half an hour or
so. It is nothing even slightly comparable to the problems of SLAB,
for example. And you don't have to maintain it at all anyway!

I like removing code as much as the next person, but I don't
understand why you are so intent on removing SLOB and willing to
dismiss its advantages so quickly.

--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/