Re: [GIT PULL] Lockless SLUB slowpaths for v3.1-rc1

[David Rientjes]

On Mon, 1 Aug 2011, Pekka Enberg wrote:

> Btw, I haven't measured this recently but in my testing, SLAB has
> pretty much always used more memory than SLUB. So 'throwing more
> memory at the problem' is definitely a reasonable approach for SLUB.
> 

Yes, slub _did_ use more memory than slab until the alignment of 
struct page.  That cost an additional 128MB on each of these 64GB 
machines, while the total slab usage on the client machine systemwide is 
~75MB while running netperf TCP_RR with 160 threads.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/