> What does everyone think about this patch? Unexpected, Interesting. We cut over to the native Linux allocator cache from the ACPICA cache at a time when we had some memory leaks, and it was important to be able to walk up to a machine in the field that didn't have any special build options and look in /proc to find out what the different parts of our sub-system were allocating. I don't know the merits of SLAB vs. SLUB or why Linux has two. My local configs use SLAB but I notice that recent Fedora kernels us SLUB. >From an observability point of view, I guess I like SLAB better because I can still see the 5 different ACPI caches in /proc/slabinfo, while with SLUB I can see only one or two. Note that these caches are used to interpret AML, and how much AML you interpret depends a lot on the machine. Some laptops will interpret AML all day long, while some desktops and servers will run AML only at boot-time. I guess my opinion is that I like the observatiblity we have now, and that I'd need to see measurements showing that we're paying too much for that observability. I've also just now formed an initial opinion on SLAB vs SLUB where I had none before. thanks, -Len -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
