[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1103161011370.13407@sister.anvils>
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 10:17:19 -0700 (PDT)
From: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
To: George Spelvin <linux@...izon.com>
cc: penberg@...helsinki.fi, herbert@...dor.hengli.com.au,
mpm@...enic.com, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] drivers/random: Cache align ip_random better
On Sun, 13 Mar 2011, George Spelvin wrote:
> Cache aligning the secret[] buffer makes copying from it infinitesimally
> more efficient.
> ---
> drivers/char/random.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/char/random.c b/drivers/char/random.c
> index 72a4fcb..4bcc4f2 100644
> --- a/drivers/char/random.c
> +++ b/drivers/char/random.c
> @@ -1417,8 +1417,8 @@ static __u32 twothirdsMD4Transform(__u32 const buf[4], __u32 const in[12])
> #define HASH_MASK ((1 << HASH_BITS) - 1)
>
> static struct keydata {
> - __u32 count; /* already shifted to the final position */
> __u32 secret[12];
> + __u32 count; /* already shifted to the final position */
> } ____cacheline_aligned ip_keydata[2];
>
> static unsigned int ip_cnt;
I'm intrigued: please educate me. On what architectures does cache-
aligning a 48-byte buffer (previously offset by 4 bytes) speed up
copying from it, and why? Does the copying involve 8-byte or 16-byte
instructions that benefit from that alignment, rather than cacheline
alignment?
Thanks,
Hugh
--
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