Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758544Ab2JKXLR (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Oct 2012 19:11:17 -0400 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:39036 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753010Ab2JKXLN (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Oct 2012 19:11:13 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,573,1344236400"; d="scan'208";a="204561833" From: Andi Kleen To: David Rientjes Cc: Ezequiel Garcia , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-mm@kvack.org, Tim Bird , celinux-dev@lists.celinuxforum.org Subject: Re: [Q] Default SLAB allocator References: Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 16:10:40 -0700 In-Reply-To: (David Rientjes's message of "Thu, 11 Oct 2012 15:59:19 -0700 (PDT)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.3 (gnu/linux) 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: 845 Lines: 26 David Rientjes writes: > On Thu, 11 Oct 2012, Andi Kleen wrote: > >> > While I've always thought SLUB was the default and recommended allocator, >> > I'm surprise to find that it's not always the case: >> >> iirc the main performance reasons for slab over slub have mostly >> disappeared, so in theory slab could be finally deprecated now. >> > > SLUB is a non-starter for us and incurs a >10% performance degradation in > netperf TCP_RR. When did you last test? Our regressions had disappeared a few kernels ago. -Andi -- ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only -- 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/