Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751252Ab1F1VKz (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Jun 2011 17:10:55 -0400 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.44.51]:54413 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750819Ab1F1VKv (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Jun 2011 17:10:51 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=dkim-signature:date:from:x-x-sender:to:cc:subject: in-reply-to:message-id:references:user-agent:mime-version:content-type:x-system-of-record; b=oqYv0WtRgZqpDvsExj7h6NxYYx/L5alMGFAr1GQmRe30EH12RSWUXCxL+JSxshjag 1vOfAIZ06fi5a2JTJiTuQ== Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:10:42 -0700 (PDT) From: David Rientjes X-X-Sender: rientjes@chino.kir.corp.google.com To: Ben Greear cc: David Daney , Christoph Lameter , Marcin Slusarz , Pekka Enberg , Matt Mackall , LKML , linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] slub: reduce overhead of slub_debug In-Reply-To: <4E0A41CB.1020908@candelatech.com> Message-ID: References: <20110626193918.GA3339@joi.lan> <4E0A2E26.5000001@gmail.com> <4E0A41CB.1020908@candelatech.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-System-Of-Record: true Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1345 Lines: 31 On Tue, 28 Jun 2011, Ben Greear wrote: > > SLUB debugging is useful only to diagnose issues or test new code, nobody > > is going to be enabling it in production environment. We don't need 30 > > new lines of code that make one thing slightly faster, in fact we'd prefer > > to have as simple and minimal code as possible for debugging features > > unless you're adding more debugging coverage. > > If your problem happens under load, then the overhead of slub could > significantly > change the behaviour of the system. You're talking about slub debugging and not slub in general, I assume. > Anything that makes it more efficient > without > unduly complicating code should be a win. That posted patch wasn't all that > complicated, and even if it has bugs, it could be fixed easily enough. > "Even if it has bugs"? Ask Pekka to merge this and be on the receiving end of every other kernel development's flames when slub debugging no longer finds their problems but instead has bugs of its own. Again, we want simple and minimal slub debugging code unless you're adding a new feature. -- 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/