Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759693AbXLUXvf (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:51:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755264AbXLUXv1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:51:27 -0500 Received: from relay2.sgi.com ([192.48.171.30]:48778 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752429AbXLUXv1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:51:27 -0500 Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:51:25 -0800 (PST) From: Christoph Lameter X-X-Sender: clameter@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com To: Ingo Molnar cc: Peter Zijlstra , Linus Torvalds , Steven Rostedt , LKML , Andrew Morton , Christoph Hellwig , "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: Major regression on hackbench with SLUB (more numbers) In-Reply-To: <20071221225413.GA26189@elte.hu> Message-ID: References: <20071211143336.GA17866@elte.hu> <20071221120908.GA15926@elte.hu> <1198275391.30889.3.camel@lappy> <1198275453.30889.4.camel@lappy> <20071221225413.GA26189@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1485 Lines: 28 On Fri, 21 Dec 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote: > I'm really getting worried that you are apparently incapable of grasping > such _SIMPLE_ concepts. Who the heck cares whether you put in zeros or > whatever else in some of the fields? People use it to know how many > objects are allocated and sure SLUB knows that count, sheesh. How on > earth can you come up with a lame excuse like that? You dont like the > 'SLAB' portion of the name perhaps? Is it NIH again? NIH? I wrote major portions of SLAB. I would be hating my own product. Could you get the facts straight at some point? This is getting weird. > Really, if your behavior is representative of how our SLAB allocator > will be maintained in the future then i'm very, very worried :-( You > ignore and downplay clear-cut regressions, you insult and attack > testers, you are incredibly stupid about user ABIs (or pretend to be so) > and you distort and mislead all the way. What will you be able to do in > the much less clear-cut cases?? I analyzed the issue and argued that the issues that one test showed in SLUB is a really special case and then you conclude that I ignore all regressions? I have addressed and responded to all reports of regressions that came to me. -- 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/