On Fri, 7 Dec 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
quoted text > The biggest cost of __slab_alloc() in my profile is the "slab_lock()", but
> that may not be the one that causes problems in a 64-cpu setup, so it
> would be good to have that verified.
Hmmmm.. This would indicate lock contention on a slab.
quoted text > [ The whole node match thing is likely totally bogus. I suspect we pay
> *more* in trying to match nodes than we'd ever likely pay in just
> returning the wrong node for an allocation, but that's neither here nor
> there ]
Node match is necessary in order to make the allocator able to get memory
for the node that the caller requested.
--
unsubscribe notice 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/
Messages in current thread:
Re: Major regression on hackbench with SLUB , Christoph Lameter , (Thu Dec 13, 6:11 pm)