diff options
| author | Alan Cox <alc@FreeBSD.org> | 2011-05-20 17:28:00 +0000 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Alan Cox <alc@FreeBSD.org> | 2011-05-20 17:28:00 +0000 |
| commit | 59d7277f4a32516fea3874ad5ede972ed5e10032 (patch) | |
| tree | 6f9a28aec947209d557d39a5144727d27a6331c8 /sys/vm | |
| parent | d9b2153b4eea0b7932433a38c7d39b5bab4ba00f (diff) | |
Notes
Diffstat (limited to 'sys/vm')
| -rw-r--r-- | sys/vm/uma_int.h | 6 |
1 files changed, 3 insertions, 3 deletions
diff --git a/sys/vm/uma_int.h b/sys/vm/uma_int.h index 77135933ee3f..ae3e2ff33c68 100644 --- a/sys/vm/uma_int.h +++ b/sys/vm/uma_int.h @@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ * * The uma_slab_t may be embedded in a UMA_SLAB_SIZE chunk of memory or it may * be allocated off the page from a special slab zone. The free list within a - * slab is managed with a linked list of indexes, which are 8 bit values. If + * slab is managed with a linked list of indices, which are 8 bit values. If * UMA_SLAB_SIZE is defined to be too large I will have to switch to 16bit * values. Currently on alpha you can get 250 or so 32 byte items and on x86 * you can get 250 or so 16byte items. For item sizes that would yield more @@ -56,9 +56,9 @@ * wasted between items due to alignment problems. This may yield a much better * memory footprint for certain sizes of objects. Another alternative is to * increase the UMA_SLAB_SIZE, or allow for dynamic slab sizes. I prefer - * dynamic slab sizes because we could stick with 8 bit indexes and only use + * dynamic slab sizes because we could stick with 8 bit indices and only use * large slab sizes for zones with a lot of waste per slab. This may create - * ineffeciencies in the vm subsystem due to fragmentation in the address space. + * inefficiencies in the vm subsystem due to fragmentation in the address space. * * The only really gross cases, with regards to memory waste, are for those * items that are just over half the page size. You can get nearly 50% waste, |