[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080304.161003.129716254.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2008 16:10:03 -0800 (PST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: npiggin@...e.de
Cc: clameter@....com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com,
dada1@...mosbay.com
Subject: Re: [rfc][patch 1/3] slub: fix small HWCACHE_ALIGN alignment
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 01:06:37 +0100
> On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 01:16:44PM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > On Mon, 3 Mar 2008, Nick Piggin wrote:
> >
> > > > HWCACHE_ALIGN means that you want the object to be aligned at
> > > > cacheline boundaries for optimization. Why does crossing cacheline
> > > > boundaries matter in this case?
> > >
> > > No, HWCACHE_ALIGN means that you want the object not to cross cacheline
> > > boundaries for at least cache_line_size() bytes. You invented new
> >
> > Interesting new definition....
>
> Huh?? It is not a new definition, it is exactly what SLAB does. And
> then you go and do something different and claim that you follow
> what slab does.
I completely agree with Nick.
--
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