From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756069AbYIHWmp (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Sep 2008 18:42:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754461AbYIHWmY (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Sep 2008 18:42:24 -0400 Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([213.235.205.2]:45401 "EHLO one.firstfloor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753985AbYIHWmX (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Sep 2008 18:42:23 -0400 To: Linus Torvalds Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" , x86 maintainers , Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [git pull] x86 fixes From: Andi Kleen References: <200809081752.m88Hq6tn005080@askone.hos.anvin.org> Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 00:42:22 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Linus Torvalds's message of "Mon, 8 Sep 2008 11:17:39 -0700 (PDT)") Message-ID: <87tzcqtg35.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Linus Torvalds writes: > > And I have to say, that whole X86_GENERIC -> L1_CACHE_BYTES=128 -> > cache_line_size() -> SLAB/SLUB/SLOB alignment worries me too. Looking at SLAB/SLUB should actually auto detect the cache line at runtime. But there is likely other bloat caused by it. > that, I really don't feel like I want to force 128-byte alignment on > everybody, just because the P4 was a pig in cacheline size. Similar feeling here. -Andi -- ak@linux.intel.com