Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 7 Mar 2008 05:37:00 +0100 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: [rfc][patch 2/3] slab: introduce SMP alignment |
| |
On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 01:31:14PM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Mon, 3 Mar 2008, Nick Piggin wrote: > > > And maybe the VSMP guys will want to blow this out to their internode > > alignment? > > > > max(!CONFIG_TINY && num_possible_cpus() > 1 ? (is_vsmp ? internode_alignemnt : cache_line_size()) : 0, mandatory_alignment) > > No the slab allocators were optimized for VSMP so that the > internode_alignment is not necessary there. That was actually one of the > requirements that triggered the slab numa work.
BTW. can you explain this incredible claim that the slab allocators do not need internode_alignment to avoid false sharing of allocated objects on VSMP? I don't understand how that would work at all.
| |