[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4C2CFC87.6020003@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2010 13:37:27 -0700
From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
CC: "Kirsher, Jeffrey T" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"gospo@...hat.com" <gospo@...hat.com>,
"bphilips@...ell.com" <bphilips@...ell.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [net-next-2.6 PATCH v2] x86: Align skb w/ start of cacheline
on newer core 2/Xeon Arch
Andi Kleen wrote:
> Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com> writes:
>
>
> Sorry for the late comment.
>
>>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_MCORE2
>> +/*
>> + * We handle most unaligned accesses in hardware. On the other hand
>> + * unaligned DMA can be quite expensive on some Nehalem processors.
>> + *
>> + * Based on this we disable the IP header alignment in network drivers.
>> + */
>> +#define NET_IP_ALIGN 0
>> +#endif
>> #endif /* _ASM_X86_SYSTEM_H */
>
> The ifdef should be imho dropped and the option be made unconditional
> for all x86. I am not aware of any x86 core where unalignment is really
> slow. This would increase the chance of it actually working on many
> configurations which do not necessarily optimize for Core2.
>
> -Andi
Seems to make sense to me. I will see about generating a patch that
drops the check for CONFIG_MCORE2.
Thanks,
Alex
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists