On Fri, 2007-12-21 at 23:16 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, 2007-12-21 at 14:11 -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote: > > On Fri, 21 Dec 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > > > If you aren't even motivated to fix the problems that have been reported, > > > then SLUB isn't even a _potential_ solution, it's purely a problem, and > > > since I am not IN THE LEAST interested in having three different > > > allocators around, SLUB is going to get axed. > > > > Not motivated? I have analyzed the problem in detail and when it comes > > down to it there is not much impact that I can see in real life > > applications. I have always responded to the regression reported also via > > TPC-C. > > But you are dismissing the hackbench regression, which is not a small > one. It runs an astonishing 10x slower. >
BTW, does /proc/slabinfo exist again? I thought we set that as a requirement for SLUB to be the default and a full replacement for SLAB. -- 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/