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: <herbert@...>, <nickpiggin@...>, <netdev@...>, <linux-kernel@...>
Date: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 - 9:03 pm

On Wed, 14 Nov 2007, David Miller wrote:


Well this is likely the result of the SLUB regression. If you allocate an 
order 1 page then the zone locks need to be taken. SLAB queues the a 
couple of higher order pages and can so serve a couple of requests without 
going into the page allocator whereas SLUB has to go directly to the page 
allocator for allocate and free. I guess that needs fixing in the page 
allocator. Or do I need to add a mechanism to buffer higher order page 
allcoations to SLUB?


-
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)