lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Feb]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] add new DMA_ADDR_T_SIZE define
On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, David S. Miller wrote:

> Yes true, storing the two consequetive 32-bit values is better
> for store buffer compression of the cpu. Using memset is much
> more inefficient because you push the full set of data once
> then you push non-compressible stores to the same data through
> the cpu.
>
> I'm not talking out of my ass, I've measured this.

So is the current wisdom something like "always treat dma_addr_t as a u64
and be happy"?

Ion

--
It is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool,
than to open it and remove all doubt.

-
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 13:33    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site