Re: 2.6.24-rc2: Network commit causes SLUB performance regression with tbench

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: David Miller <davem@...>
Cc: <clameter@...>, <netdev@...>, <herbert@...>, <linux-kernel@...>
Date: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 - 7:39 pm

On Wednesday 14 November 2007 22:10, David Miller wrote:

OK, that makes sense. BTW, are you taking advantage of kmalloc's
"quantization" into slabs WRT the linear data area? I wonder if
it would be at all useful...



That brings performance back up!

I wonder why it isn't causing a problem for SLAB...
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
2.6.24-rc2 slab vs slob tbench numbers, Nick Piggin, (Fri Nov 9, 8:36 am)
Re: 2.6.24-rc2 slab vs slob tbench numbers, Matt Mackall, (Mon Nov 12, 4:13 pm)
Re: 2.6.24-rc2 slab vs slob tbench numbers, Nick Piggin, (Tue Nov 13, 7:44 am)
Re: 2.6.24-rc2 slab vs slob tbench numbers, Christoph Lameter, (Fri Nov 9, 11:15 am)
Re: 2.6.24-rc2 slab vs slob tbench numbers, Christoph Lameter, (Fri Nov 9, 1:49 pm)
Re: 2.6.24-rc2: Network commit causes SLUB performance regre..., Christoph Lameter, (Mon Nov 12, 3:44 pm)
Re: 2.6.24-rc2: Network commit causes SLUB performance regre..., Christoph Lameter, (Wed Nov 14, 9:03 pm)
Re: 2.6.24-rc2: Network commit causes SLUB performance regre..., Christoph Lameter, (Wed Nov 14, 2:33 pm)
Re: 2.6.24-rc2: Network commit causes SLUB performance regre..., Nick Piggin, (Tue Nov 13, 7:39 pm)