On 08/25/2009 10:33 PM, Balbir Singh wrote:
>> +It consists of three modules: >> + - xvmalloc.ko: memory allocator > > I've seen your case for a custom allocator, but why can't we > > 1) Refactor slob and use it SLOB is fundamentally a different allocator. It looked at it in detail but could not image how can I make it suitable for the project. SLOB really does not fit it. > 2) Do we care about the optimizations in SLUB w.r.t. scalability in > your module? If so.. will xvmalloc meet those requirements? > Scalability is desired which xvmalloc lacks in its current state. My plan is to have a wrapper around xvmalloc that creates per-cpu pools and leave xvmalloc core simple. Along with this, detailed profiling needs to be done to see where the bottlenecks are in the core itself. > > What level of compression have you observed? Any speed trade-offs? > All the performance numbers can be found at: http://code.google.com/p/compcache/wiki/Performance I also summarized these in patch [0/4]: http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/8/24/8 The compression ratio is highly workload dependent. On "generic" desktop workload, stats show: - ~80% of pages compressing to PAGE_SIZE/2 or less. - ~1% incompressible pages. For the speed part, please refer to performance numbers at link above. It show cases where it help or hurts the performance. Thanks, Nitin _______________________________________________ linux-mm-cc mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/linux-mm-cc
