lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Jul]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Patch 2.5.25: Ensure xtime_lock and timerlist_lock are on difft cachelines
On Fri, Jul 26, 2002 at 05:56:19PM +1000, Rusty Russell wrote:
> In message <20020726125605.A2822@phreaker.net> you write:
> > This patch was not meant to be a definitive fix for do_gettimeofday.
> > I thought having diffrent locks on the same cacheline was bad. Atleast,
> > I don't think there'd be any negative performance impact due to my patch.
> > Pls correct me if I am wrong.
>
> Did you ever wonder why we don't declare spinlock to be ____cacheline_aligned?

Yep...and for long enough...(I think..)..or there'd have been an RFC
or a stupid question to lkml sometime from me :)

> While it's probably justified in this case, you pay for it in a slight
> increase in size...
>

I thought you were of the opinion that "memory is cheap" ;-)

-Kiran
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:27    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans