On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 09:48:14AM -0600, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Thu, 25 Nov 2010, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > > Please try SLAB instead SLUB (it can be switched by kernel build option). > > SLUB try to use high order allocation implicitly. > > SLAB uses orders 0-1. Order is fixed per slab cache and determined based > on object size at slab creation. > > SLUB uses orders 0-3. Falls back to smallest order if alloc order cannot > be met by the page allocator. > > One can reduce SLUB to SLAB orders by specifying the following kernel > commandline parameter: > > slub_max_order=1 Can we also mess with these /sys files on the fly? [/sys/kernel/slab]# grep . kmalloc-*/order | sort -n -k2 -t- kmalloc-8/order:0 kmalloc-16/order:0 kmalloc-32/order:0 kmalloc-64/order:0 kmalloc-96/order:0 kmalloc-128/order:0 kmalloc-192/order:0 kmalloc-256/order:1 kmalloc-512/order:2 kmalloc-1024/order:3 kmalloc-2048/order:3 kmalloc-4096/order:3 kmalloc-8192/order:3 I'm not familiar with how slub works, but I assume there's some overhead or some reason not to just use order 0 for <= kmalloc-4096? Or is it purely just trying to reduce cpu by calling alloc_pages less often? Simon- -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>