On Tue 30-04-24 17:42:18, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to propose a session about the next steps for SLUB. This is > different from the BOF about sheaves that Matthew suggested, which would be > not suitable for the whole group due to being not fleshed out enough yet. > But the session could be scheduled after the BOF so if we do brainstorm > something promising there, the result could be discussed as part of the full > session. > > Aside from that my preliminary plan is to discuss: > > - what was made possible by reducing the slab allocators implementations to > a single one, and what else could be done now with a single implementation > > - the work-in-progress work (for now in the context of maple tree) on SLUB > per-cpu array caches and preallocation > > - what functionality would SLUB need to gain so the extra caching done by > bpf allocator on top wouldn't be necessary? (kernel/bpf/memalloc.c) > > - similar wrt lib/objpool.c (did you even noticed it was added? :) > > - maybe the mempool functionality could be better integrated as well? > > - are there more cases where people have invented layers outside mm and that > could be integrated with some effort? IIRC io_uring also has some caching on > top currently... > > - better/more efficient memcg integration? > > - any other features people would like SLUB to have? Thanks a lot Vlastimi. This is quite a list. Do you think this is a fit into a single time slot or would that benefit from splitting into 2 slots? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
