lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Dec]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Centralise definitions of sector_t and blkcnt_t

On Dec 4 2006 19:44, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>[...]allow even 64-bit architectures to say that they only want 32-bit
>sector_t's and page indexes [...]
>
>I don't know how big a deal it is, but I could imagine that we could
>actually save memory in a smaller "struct page", for example, on 64bit
>architectures by just using a 4-byte index.
>
>For now, the !64BIT makes sense simply because a 64-bit architecture
>probably doesn't care, and might as well just use 64 bits anyway (ie you
>tend to have tons of memory there anyway). And I suspect it doesn't
>actually even help on 64-bits due to structure alignment etc issues, but
>am too lazy to go check.

sparc could benefit from this (someone go correct me if I am wrong).
Not only in struct sizes, but maybe also a little in execution time.


-`J'
--
-
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: 2006-12-05 20:07    [W:0.027 / U:1.320 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site