lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Nov]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] x86: eliminate redundant/contradicting cache line size config options
>>> Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> 19.11.09 09:13 >>>
>On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 08:52:40PM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>Basically what I think we should do is consider L1_CACHE_BYTES to be
>*the* correct default value to use for 1) avoiding false sharing (which
>seems to be the most common use), and 2) optimal and repeatable per-object
>packing into cachelines (which is more of a micro-optimization to be
>applied carefully to really critical structures).

But then this really shouldn't be called L1_CACHE_... Though I realize
that the naming seems to already be broken - looking over the cache
line specifiers for CPUID leaf 2, there's really no L1 with 128 byte lines,
just two L2s.

One question however is whether e.g. cache line ping-pong between
L3s is really costing that much on non-NUMA, as opposed to it
happening between L1s.

Jan



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-11-19 09:41    [W:0.131 / U:0.192 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site