Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757271AbYJWNm6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Oct 2008 09:42:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757167AbYJWNmM (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Oct 2008 09:42:12 -0400 Received: from nlpi025.sbcis.sbc.com ([207.115.36.54]:34413 "EHLO nlpi025.prodigy.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757270AbYJWNmL (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Oct 2008 09:42:11 -0400 Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 06:40:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter X-X-Sender: cl@quilx.com To: Miklos Szeredi cc: penberg@cs.helsinki.fi, nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, hugh@veritas.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: SLUB defrag pull request? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <1223883004.31587.15.camel@penberg-laptop> <48FE6306.6020806@linux-foundation.org> <84144f020810221348j536f0d84vca039ff32676e2cc@mail.gmail.com> <1224745831.25814.21.camel@penberg-laptop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: -2.5 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 769 Lines: 17 On Thu, 23 Oct 2008, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > I think the _real_ problem is that instead of fancy features like this > defragmenter, SLUB should first concentrate on getting the code solid > enough to replace the other allocators. Solid? What is not solid? The SLUB design was made in part because of the defrag problems that were not easy to solve with SLAB. The ability to lock down a slab allows stabilizing objects. We discussed solutions to the fragmentation problem for years and did not get anywhere with SLAB. -- 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/