On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 7:39 AM, Christoph Lameter <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, 2 Apr 2009, Nitin Gupta wrote: > >> Justification for this custom allocator is present in xvmalloc changelog >> itself. It gives reason for not using SLUB and SLOB. During review >> cycle, I never got any arguments against that justification. > > The use of highmem is pretty unique. But that restrict the usefulness to > 32 bit processors with too much RAM. > >
I would again like to mention that apart from highmem, xvmalloc is O(1) and is very memory efficient too. Sometime in future I hope to present it as replacement for funny SLOB allocator. For this I will require lot of data which is another major work.... For now, I will rename xvmalloc to rzmalloc and move it to drivers/block/ramzswap. As for data to justify ramzswap inclusion -- its going to be hard. It just 'feels' lot more responsive with compression but not sure how to quantify this. Maybe I will get some data by next release. Thanks to you all for your reviews and suggestions. Nitin _______________________________________________ linux-mm-cc mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/linux-mm-cc
