Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759910AbYCCTHN (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Mar 2008 14:07:13 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752877AbYCCTG5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Mar 2008 14:06:57 -0500 Received: from relay2.sgi.com ([192.48.171.30]:59307 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752391AbYCCTG4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Mar 2008 14:06:56 -0500 Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 11:06:55 -0800 (PST) From: Christoph Lameter X-X-Sender: clameter@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com To: Nick Piggin cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com, David Miller , Eric Dumazet Subject: Re: [rfc][patch 2/3] slab: introduce SMP alignment In-Reply-To: <20080303093529.GB15091@wotan.suse.de> Message-ID: References: <20080303093449.GA15091@wotan.suse.de> <20080303093529.GB15091@wotan.suse.de> 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 Content-Length: 700 Lines: 18 On Mon, 3 Mar 2008, Nick Piggin wrote: > Introduce SLAB_SMP_ALIGN, for allocations where false sharing must be > minimised on SMP systems. Mandatory alignment are specified as a parameter to kmem_cache_create not as flags. Ycan specify the alignment as a parameter. i.e. L1_CACHE_BYTES or cache_line_size(). Maybe we should drop SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN because of the confusion is creates because it seems that flags can be used to enforce alignments? -- 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/