Re: [patch 0/6] Per cpu structures for SLUB

Hi,

while I like this patch set I'm at odds with the interaction of this and
making the alloc/free fast paths lockless. 

The main race is s->cpu_slab[] and c->freelist. How does one close that
gap?

(btw, have you looked at my -rt slub patch?)

-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [patch 0/6] Per cpu structures for SLUB
    • From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [patch 0/6] Per cpu structures for SLUB
    • From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 2.6.20-rc5 1/1] MM: enhance Linux swap subsystem
• Next by Date: intel_rng: FWH not detected (and no entropy)
• Previous by thread: [patch 1/6] SLUB: Avoid page struct cacheline bouncing due to remote frees to cpu slab
• Next by thread: Re: [patch 0/6] Per cpu structures for SLUB
• 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]