[lkml]   [2007]   [Nov]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [RFC] Documentation about unaligned memory access
    On Fri, 23 Nov 2007, Alan Cox wrote:

    > Its usually faster if you don't misalign on x86 as well.

    i'm not sure if i agree with "usually"... but i know you (alan) are
    probably aware of the exact requirements of the hw.

    for everyone else:

    on intel x86 processors an access is unaligned only if it crosses a
    cacheline boundary (64 bytes). otherwise it's aligned. the penalty for
    crossing a cacheline boundary varies from ~12 cycles (core2) to many
    dozens of cycles (p4).

    on AMD x86 pre-family 10h the boundary is 8 bytes, and on fam 10h it's 16
    bytes. the penalty is a mere 3 cycles if an access crosses the specified

    if you're making <= 4 byte accesses i recommend not worrying about
    alignment on x86. it's pretty hard to beat the hardware support.

    i curse all the RISC and embedded processor designers who pretend
    unaligned accesses are something evil and to be avoided. in case you're
    worried, MIPS patent 4,814,976 expired in december 2006 :)

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2007-11-23 07:21    [W:0.025 / U:19.452 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site