From: Julien Grall <julien@xen.org>
To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>,
"xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
Cc: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@citrix.com>,
Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
Volodymyr Babchuk <volodymyr_babchuk@epam.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/11] Arm/optee: don't open-code xzalloc_flex_struct()
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2021 19:19:21 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9f95c37b-dc4a-d2cf-01c1-98d2108fae88@xen.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aad23304-c727-2921-59fe-ab3763f5da03@suse.com>
Hi Jan,
On 08/04/2021 13:23, Jan Beulich wrote:
> There is a difference in generated code: xzalloc_bytes() forces
> SMP_CACHE_BYTES alignment. I think we not only don't need this here, but
> actually don't want it.
So I think moving to xmalloc_flex_struct() is a pretty good move. But I
am actually a bit confused with the argument used.
Could you provide some details why you think forcing the array to be
aligned to the maximum cache line supported (128 bytes on Arm) is wrong?
Cheers,
--
Julien Grall
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-13 18:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-08 12:13 [PATCH 00/11] assorted replacement of x[mz]alloc_bytes() Jan Beulich
2021-04-08 12:16 ` [PATCH 01/11] x86/HVM: avoid effectively open-coding xzalloc_flex_struct() Jan Beulich
2021-04-08 12:20 ` Andrew Cooper
2021-04-08 12:17 ` [PATCH 02/11] x86/vPMU: " Jan Beulich
2021-04-08 12:25 ` Andrew Cooper
2021-04-08 12:29 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-08 12:17 ` [PATCH 03/11] x86/MCE: avoid effectively open-coding xmalloc_array() Jan Beulich
2021-04-08 12:18 ` [PATCH 04/11] x86/HVM: " Jan Beulich
2021-04-08 12:19 ` [PATCH 05/11] x86/oprofile: " Jan Beulich
2021-04-08 12:20 ` [PATCH 06/11] x86/IRQ: avoid over-alignment in alloc_pirq_struct() Jan Beulich
2021-04-08 12:20 ` [PATCH 07/11] EFI/runtime: avoid effectively open-coding xmalloc_array() Jan Beulich
2021-04-08 12:21 ` [PATCH 08/11] hypfs: avoid effectively open-coding xzalloc_array() Jan Beulich
2021-04-08 14:28 ` Juergen Gross
2021-04-08 12:21 ` [PATCH 09/11] kexec: avoid effectively open-coding xzalloc_flex_struct() Jan Beulich
2021-04-09 12:54 ` Andrew Cooper
2021-04-09 13:23 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-08 12:22 ` [PATCH 10/11] video/lfb: avoid effectively open-coding xzalloc_array() Jan Beulich
2021-04-08 12:23 ` [PATCH 11/11] Arm/optee: don't open-code xzalloc_flex_struct() Jan Beulich
2021-04-13 18:19 ` Julien Grall [this message]
2021-04-14 7:03 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-15 10:26 ` Julien Grall
2021-04-15 11:02 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-15 11:31 ` Julien Grall
2021-04-08 12:57 ` [PATCH 00/11] assorted replacement of x[mz]alloc_bytes() Andrew Cooper
2021-04-08 14:12 ` Jan Beulich
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=9f95c37b-dc4a-d2cf-01c1-98d2108fae88@xen.org \
--to=julien@xen.org \
--cc=george.dunlap@citrix.com \
--cc=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=sstabellini@kernel.org \
--cc=volodymyr_babchuk@epam.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).