On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 03:45 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > > I still have trouble to see that SLOB still has much to offer. An embedded > > allocator that in many cases has more allocation overhead than the default > > one? Ok you still have advantages if allocations are rounded up to the > > next power of two for a kmalloc and because of the combining of different > > types of allocations in a single slab if there are an overall small number > > of allocations. If one would create a custom slab for the worst problems > > there then this may also go away. > > I suspect it would be a good idea anyways to reevaluate the power of two > slabs. Perhaps a better distribution can be found based on some profiling? > I did profile kmalloc using a systemtap script some time ago but don't > remember the results exactly, but iirc it looked like it could be improved.
I remember wli trying to work out a series that had minimal fragmentation. IIRC he was mixing a fibonaci series with the power of two series. Bill, do you remember getting anywhere?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
