[lkml]   [2007]   [Nov]   [26]   [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, Arne Georg Gleditsch wrote:

> dean gaudet <> writes:
> > 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
> > boundary.
> Worth noting though, is that atomic accesses that cross cache lines on
> an Opteron system is going to lock down the Hypertransport fabric for
> you during the operation -- which is obviously not so nice.

ooh awesome, i hadn't measured that before.

on a 2 node sockF / revF with a random pointer chase running on cpu 0 /
node 0 i see the avg load-to-load cache miss latency jump from 77ns to
109ns when i add an unaligned lock-intensive workload on one core of node
1. the worst i can get the pointer chase latency to is 273ns when i add
two threads on node 1 fighting over an unaligned lock.

on a 4 node (square) the worst case i can get seems to be an increase from
98ns with no antagonist to 385ns with 6 antagonists fighting over an
unaligned lock on the other 3 nodes.


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: 2007-11-26 15:59    [W:0.054 / U:21.120 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site