Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 3 Mar 2008 23:30:56 +0200 | From | "Pekka Enberg" <> | Subject | Re: [rfc][patch 1/3] slub: fix small HWCACHE_ALIGN alignment |
| |
Hi,
On Mon, 3 Mar 2008, Nick Piggin wrote: > > > HWCACHE_ALIGN means that you want the object to be aligned at > > > cacheline boundaries for optimization. Why does crossing cacheline > > > boundaries matter in this case? > > > > No, HWCACHE_ALIGN means that you want the object not to cross cacheline > > boundaries for at least cache_line_size() bytes. You invented new
On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 11:16 PM, Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> wrote: > Interesting new definition....
Well, not my definition either but SLAB has guaranteed that for small objects in the past, so I think Nick has a point here. However, with all this back and forth, I've lost track why this matters. I suppose it causes regression on some workload?
Pekka
| |