[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0803061816430.28976@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 18:20:40 -0800 (PST)
From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
Subject: Re: [rfc][patch 1/3] slub: fix small HWCACHE_ALIGN alignment
On Fri, 7 Mar 2008, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > Do you have a case in mind where that would be useful? We had a
>
> Patch 3/3
Those already have SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN.
The point is to switch off alignment for UP? Cant we do that with
SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN too since SLOB seemed to work successfully without it
in the past?
> > Note that there is also KMEM_CACHE which picks up the alignment from
> > the compiler.
>
> Yeah, that's not quite as good either. My allocation flag is dynamic, so
> it will not bloat things for no reason on UP machines and SMP kernels.
> It also aligns to the detected machine cacheline size rather than a
> compile time constant.
Is that really a noteworthy effect?
--
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