Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760993AbXJEJ1P (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Oct 2007 05:27:15 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755553AbXJEJ1A (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Oct 2007 05:27:00 -0400 Received: from brick.kernel.dk ([87.55.233.238]:13422 "EHLO kernel.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755003AbXJEJ07 (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Oct 2007 05:26:59 -0400 Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2007 11:28:22 +0200 From: Jens Axboe To: Pekka Enberg Cc: David Chinner , David Miller , cebbert@redhat.com, willy@linux.intel.com, clameter@sgi.com, nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, hch@lst.de, mel@skynet.ie, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, suresh.b.siddha@intel.com Subject: Re: SLUB performance regression vs SLAB Message-ID: <20071005092822.GL5711@kernel.dk> References: <470554D9.2050505@redhat.com> <20071004.141113.08322956.davem@davemloft.net> <47055F84.109@redhat.com> <20071004.150718.95506800.davem@davemloft.net> <20071004222356.GH23367404@sgi.com> <20071005064853.GI5711@kernel.dk> <84144f020710050219k2460631cjfd556d6eae645887@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <84144f020710050219k2460631cjfd556d6eae645887@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1569 Lines: 35 On Fri, Oct 05 2007, Pekka Enberg wrote: > Hi, > > On 10/5/07, Jens Axboe wrote: > > I'd like to second Davids emails here, this is a serious problem. Having > > a reproducible test case lowers the barrier for getting the problem > > fixed by orders of magnitude. It's the difference between the problem > > getting fixed in a day or two and it potentially lingering for months, > > because email ping-pong takes forever and "the test team has moved on to > > other tests, we'll let you know the results of test foo in 3 weeks time > > when we have a new slot on the box" just removing any developer > > motivation to work on the issue. > > What I don't understand is that why don't the people who _have_ access > to the test case fix the problem? Unlike slab, slub is not a pile of > crap that only Christoph can hack on... Often the people testing are only doing just that, testing. So they kindly offer to test any patches and so on, which usually takes forever because of the above limitations in response time, machine availability, etc. Writing a small test module to exercise slub/slab in various ways (allocating from all cpus freeing from one, as described) should not be too hard. Perhaps that would be enough to find this performance discrepancy between slab and slub? -- Jens Axboe - 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/