On 08/29/2009 01:23 AM, Balbir Singh wrote: > * Nitin Gupta<[email protected]> [2009-08-25 23:41:06]: > >> 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. >> > > I've not yet tested the patches, but adding another allocator does > worry me a bit. Do you intend to allow other users to consume the > allocator routines? >
No. This allocator is not compiled as separate module, does not export any symbol and is compiled with ramzswap. So, no one else can use it. Thanks, Nitin _______________________________________________ linux-mm-cc mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/linux-mm-cc
