From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
To: Blaisorblade <blaisorblade@yahoo.it>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] x86_64: fix L1_CACHE_SHIFT_MAX for Intel EM64T [for 2.6.14?]
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 01:33:03 +0200
User-Agent: KMail/1.8
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, Jeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
References: <20051025221105.21106.95194.stgit@zion.home.lan> <200510260024.17241.ak@suse.de> <200510260044.26138.blaisorblade@yahoo.it>
In-Reply-To: <200510260044.26138.blaisorblade@yahoo.it>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200510260133.03425.ak@suse.de>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 833
Lines: 24

On Wednesday 26 October 2005 00:44, Blaisorblade wrote:

> For what I see, that's based on the tradeoff between space and contention -
> for instance there are few zones only, so there's no big waste.

If space is precious it shouldn't be padded at all.

> In  practice, interpreting !X86_GENERIC as "I will run this kernel on _this_
> processor" could also be done.

That is what it always meant yes.

> However, in case you didn't note, max_align is never enough on EM64T
> currently, right?

I will prepare patches for .15 to remove it completely, that should fix that 
problem.

-Andi
-
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/