In message <20030113074516.GA4677@gtf.org> you write:
> On Mon, Jan 13, 2003 at 06:24:40PM +1100, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > Dave: Anton suggested you might have a justification for
> > __cacheline_aligned doing something on UP?
> >
> > I think I'd prefer __cacheline_aligned to be the same as
> > __cacheline_aligned_in_smp, and have a new __cacheline_aligned_always
> > for those who REALLY want it (if any).
>
> See the recent thread on tg3 and cacheline_aligned for David's
> description... I and one other did some performance measurements and
> ____cacheline_aligned proved useful even on UP...
Thanks, finally found the thread.
> sigh. I wish I had caught you on IRC.
<sniff> I miss you too Jeff... 8)
> Don't you think changing the meaning of cacheline_aligned, and adding a
> new __cacheline_aligned_always to mean what it used to, is completely
> pointless churn??
Agreed. Now I understand that's it's also possibly useful on UP, not
just programmer laziness, like it is in the module.h case 8)
Of course, it'd be nice to see benchmarks to justify each of these,
but wouldn't it always?
Rusty.
-- Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell. - 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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 22:00:48 EST