From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sat, 5 May 2007 08:39:19 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [RFC 0/3] Slab Defrag / Slab Targeted Reclaim and general Slab API changes In-Reply-To: <463C1900.7060409@cosmosbay.com> Message-ID: References: <20070504221555.642061626@sgi.com> <463C10F8.4040803@cosmosbay.com> <463C1900.7060409@cosmosbay.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Eric Dumazet Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, dgc@sgi.com, Mel Gorman List-ID: On Sat, 5 May 2007, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > Then add ___cacheline_aligned_in_smp or specify the alignment in the various > > other ways that exist. Practice is that most slabs specify > > SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN. So most slabs are cache aligned today. > > Yes but this alignement is dynamic, not at compile time. > > include/asm-i386/processor.h:739:#define cache_line_size() > (boot_cpu_data.x86_cache_alignment) Ahh.. I did not see that before. > So adding ____cacheline_aligned to 'struct file' for example would be a > regression for people with PII or PIII Yuck. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org