On Thu, 12 Feb 2009, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > The default order of kmalloc-8192 on 2*4 stoakley is an issue of calculate_order. > > > slab_size order name > ------------------------------------------------- > 4096 3 sgpool-128 > 8192 2 kmalloc-8192 > 16384 3 kmalloc-16384 > > kmalloc-8192's default order is smaller than sgpool-128's. You reverted the page allocator passthrough patch before this right? Otherwise kmalloc-8192 should not exist and allocation calls for 8192 bytes would be converted inline to request of an order 1 page from the page allocator.
