Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932586AbZKSEvA (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Nov 2009 23:51:00 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932547AbZKSEvA (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Nov 2009 23:51:00 -0500 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:53695 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932541AbZKSEu7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Nov 2009 23:50:59 -0500 Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:52:40 -0800 From: Arjan van de Ven To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Nick Piggin , Jan Beulich , tglx@linutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, Ravikiran Thirumalai , Shai Fultheim Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: eliminate redundant/contradicting cache line size config options Message-ID: <20091118205240.11d3d660@infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <20091119035640.GA18236@elte.hu> References: <4AFD5710020000780001F8F0@vpn.id2.novell.com> <20091116041407.GB5818@wotan.suse.de> <4B011677020000780001FD9D@vpn.id2.novell.com> <20091116105657.GE5818@wotan.suse.de> <20091119035640.GA18236@elte.hu> Organization: Intel X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.3 (GTK+ 2.16.6; i586-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by casper.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1366 Lines: 38 On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 04:56:40 +0100 Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Nick Piggin wrote: > > > The only other use for L1 cache size macro is to pack objects to > > cachelines better (so they always use the fewest number of lines). > > But this case is more rare nowadays people don't really count > > cachelines anymore, but I think even then it makes sense for it to > > be the largest line size in the system because we don't know how > > big L1s are, and if you want opimal L1 packing, you likely also > > want optimal Ln packing. > > We could do that - but then this default of X86_INTERNODE_CACHE_SHIFT: > > + default "7" if NUMA > > will bite us and turns the 64 bytes L1_CACHE_BYTES into an effective > 128 bytes value. > > So ... are you arguing for an increase of the default x86 linesize to > 128 bytes? 128 is basically always wrong. (unless you have a P4... but for default really we should not care about those anymore) -- Arjan van de Ven Intel Open Source Technology Centre For development, discussion and tips for power savings, visit http://www.lesswatts.org -- 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/