[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0607270844440.28990@sbz-30.cs.Helsinki.FI>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 08:47:16 +0300 (EEST)
From: Pekka J Enberg <penberg@...Helsinki.FI>
To: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
cc: Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] slab: always consider arch mandated alignment
On Thu, 27 Jul 2006, Pekka J Enberg wrote:
> Yes and that's what we have been saying all along. When you want
> performance, you use SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN and let the allocator do its job.
> I don't see much point from API point of view for the caller to explicitly
> ask for a given alignment and then in addition pass a 'yes I really meant'
> flag (SLAB_DEBUG_OVERRIDE).
Btw, /proc/slabinfo for UML with defconfig reveals change for only one
cache with my patch applied. The 'dquot' cache is created by dquot_init in
fs/dquot.c and doesn't really seem to need the alignment for anything...
Pekka
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists