Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755853AbYBHW5Q (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Feb 2008 17:57:16 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751031AbYBHW5B (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Feb 2008 17:57:01 -0500 Received: from mga06.intel.com ([134.134.136.21]:5244 "EHLO orsmga101.jf.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750772AbYBHW5A (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Feb 2008 17:57:00 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,323,1199692800"; d="scan'208";a="257174901" Message-ID: <47ACDE09.7020805@linux.intel.com> Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2008 14:56:09 -0800 From: Arjan van de Ven User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.14 (Windows/20071210) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nick Piggin CC: David Miller , torvalds@linux-foundation.org, mingo@elte.hu, jens.axboe@oracle.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alan.Brunelle@hp.com, dgc@sgi.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, vegard.nossum@gmail.com, penberg@gmail.com Subject: Re: [patch] block layer: kmemcheck fixes References: <20080207103136.GG15220@kernel.dk> <20080207104901.GF16735@elte.hu> <20080207.172246.31415231.davem@davemloft.net> <47AC7093.1070003@linux.intel.com> <20080208224427.GC4952@wotan.suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20080208224427.GC4952@wotan.suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1104 Lines: 22 Nick Piggin wrote: >>> Maybe cpus these days have so much store bandwith that doing >>> things like the above is OK, but I doubt it :-) >> on modern x86 cpus the memset may even be faster if the memory isn't in >> cache; >> the "explicit" method ends up doing Write Allocate on the cache lines >> (so read them from memory) even though they then end up being written >> entirely. >> With memset the CPU is told that the entire range is set to a new value, and >> the WA can be avoided for the whole-cachelines in the range. > > Don't you have write combining store buffers? Or is it still speculatively > issuing the reads even before the whole cacheline is combined? x86 memory order model doesn't allow that quite; and you need a "series" of at least 64 bytes without any other memory accesses in between even if it would.... not happening in practice. -- 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/