From: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com> To: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> Cc: akpm@linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, penberg@kernel.org, iamjoonsoo@lge.com, Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [RFC 1/3] Slab infrastructure for array operations Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 10:57:36 -0600 (CST) [thread overview] Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1501271054310.25124@gentwo.org> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20150127082132.GE11358@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE> On Tue, 27 Jan 2015, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > IMHO, exposing these options is not a good idea. It's really > implementation specific. And, this flag won't show consistent performance > according to specific slab implementation. For example, to get best > performance, if SLAB is used, GFP_SLAB_ARRAY_LOCAL would be the best option, > but, for the same purpose, if SLUB is used, GFP_SLAB_ARRAY_NEW would > be the best option. And, performance could also depend on number of objects > and size. Why would slab show a better performance? SLUB also can have partial allocated pages per cpu and could also get data quite fast if only a minimal number of objects are desired. SLAB is slightly better because the number of cachelines touches stays small due to the arrangement of the freelist on the slab page and the queueing approach that does not involve linked lists. GFP_SLAB_ARRAY new is best for large quantities in either allocator since SLAB also has to construct local metadata structures. > And, overriding gfp flag isn't a good idea. Someday gfp could use > these values and they can't notice that these are used in slab > subsystem with different meaning. We can put a BUILD_BUG_ON in there to ensure that the GFP flags do not get too high. The upper portion of the GFP flags is also used elsewhere. And it is an allocation option so it naturally fits in there.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com> To: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> Cc: akpm@linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, penberg@kernel.org, iamjoonsoo@lge.com, Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [RFC 1/3] Slab infrastructure for array operations Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 10:57:36 -0600 (CST) [thread overview] Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1501271054310.25124@gentwo.org> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20150127082132.GE11358@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE> On Tue, 27 Jan 2015, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > IMHO, exposing these options is not a good idea. It's really > implementation specific. And, this flag won't show consistent performance > according to specific slab implementation. For example, to get best > performance, if SLAB is used, GFP_SLAB_ARRAY_LOCAL would be the best option, > but, for the same purpose, if SLUB is used, GFP_SLAB_ARRAY_NEW would > be the best option. And, performance could also depend on number of objects > and size. Why would slab show a better performance? SLUB also can have partial allocated pages per cpu and could also get data quite fast if only a minimal number of objects are desired. SLAB is slightly better because the number of cachelines touches stays small due to the arrangement of the freelist on the slab page and the queueing approach that does not involve linked lists. GFP_SLAB_ARRAY new is best for large quantities in either allocator since SLAB also has to construct local metadata structures. > And, overriding gfp flag isn't a good idea. Someday gfp could use > these values and they can't notice that these are used in slab > subsystem with different meaning. We can put a BUILD_BUG_ON in there to ensure that the GFP flags do not get too high. The upper portion of the GFP flags is also used elsewhere. And it is an allocation option so it naturally fits in there. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-01-27 16:57 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2015-01-23 21:37 [RFC 0/3] Slab allocator array operations Christoph Lameter 2015-01-23 21:37 ` Christoph Lameter 2015-01-23 21:37 ` [RFC 1/3] Slab infrastructure for " Christoph Lameter 2015-01-23 21:37 ` Christoph Lameter 2015-01-27 8:21 ` Joonsoo Kim 2015-01-27 8:21 ` Joonsoo Kim 2015-01-27 16:57 ` Christoph Lameter [this message] 2015-01-27 16:57 ` Christoph Lameter 2015-01-28 1:33 ` Joonsoo Kim 2015-01-28 1:33 ` Joonsoo Kim 2015-01-28 15:30 ` Christoph Lameter 2015-01-28 15:30 ` Christoph Lameter 2015-01-29 7:44 ` Joonsoo Kim 2015-01-29 7:44 ` Joonsoo Kim 2015-02-03 22:55 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer 2015-02-03 22:55 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer 2015-01-23 21:37 ` [RFC 2/3] slub: Support " Christoph Lameter 2015-01-23 21:37 ` Christoph Lameter 2015-01-23 21:37 ` [RFC 3/3] Array alloc test code Christoph Lameter 2015-01-23 21:37 ` Christoph Lameter 2015-01-23 22:57 ` [RFC 0/3] Slab allocator array operations Andrew Morton 2015-01-23 22:57 ` Andrew Morton 2015-01-24 0:28 ` Christoph Lameter 2015-01-24 0:28 ` Christoph Lameter 2015-02-03 23:19 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer 2015-02-03 23:19 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer 2015-02-06 18:39 ` Christoph Lameter 2015-02-06 18:39 ` Christoph Lameter
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=alpine.DEB.2.11.1501271054310.25124@gentwo.org \ --to=cl@linux.com \ --cc=akpm@linuxfoundation.org \ --cc=brouer@redhat.com \ --cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \ --cc=iamjoonsoo@lge.com \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \ --cc=penberg@kernel.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.