On Thu, 28 Jul 2011, David Rientjes wrote: > On Thu, 28 Jul 2011, Pekka Enberg wrote: > > > Christoph, your debugging fix has been in linux-next for few days now > > and no problem have been reported. I'm considering sending the series > > to Linus. What do you think? > > > > I ran slub/lockless through some stress testing and it seems to be quite > stable on my testing cluster. There is about a 2.3% performance > improvement with the lockless slowpath on the netperf benchmark with > various thread counts on my 16-core 64GB Opterons, so I'd recommend it to > be merged into 3.1. Great. Could you also test the next stage of patches (not yet even in Pekka's tree) where we add a per cpu cache of partial allocated slab pages? This decreases the per node lock contention further. I can repost the set if the old one does not work for you. Shows significant improvement here as well. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>