[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:0.159 / U:0.752 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site