lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Mar]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Q: explicit alignment control for the slab allocator
From
Date
>>>>> "Manfred" == Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com> writes:

Manfred> First of all HW_CACHEALIGN aligns to the L1 cache, not
Manfred> SMP_CACHE_BYTES. Additionally you sometimes need a
Manfred> guaranteed alignment for other problems, afaik ARM needs 1024
Manfred> bytes for some structures due to cpu restrictions, and
Manfred> several usb controllers need 16 byte alignment.

My question is whats the point in asking for L1_CACHE_BYTES alignment
for hardware reasons when you can't see it beyond the cache controller
anyway? Sure it makes sense for data structures only used by the CPU,
but for structures that are shared between CPUs or goes to DMA
controllers it seems to make little sense.

Jes
-
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 13:29    [W:0.031 / U:8.848 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site