Re: [PATCH] 2.3.40: <linux/linkage.h> generates incorrect cache alignments

• Previous message: gokhan sozmen: "Re: i-node corruption -- who to contact?"
• In reply to: Chris Sears: "[PATCH] 2.3.40: <linux/linkage.h> generates incorrect cache alignments for 486 and above"
• Next in thread: Chris Sears: "Re: [PATCH] 2.3.40: <linux/linkage.h> generates incorrect cache alignments"
• Reply: Chris Sears: "Re: [PATCH] 2.3.40: <linux/linkage.h> generates incorrect cache alignments"
• Reply: Chris Sears: "Re: [PATCH] 2.3.40: <linux/linkage.h> generates incorrect cache alignments"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

> +#if defined(CONFIG_X86) && !defined(CONFIG_M386)
> +#define __ALIGN .align L1_CACHE_BYTES,0x90
> +#if L1_CACHE_BYTES == 32
> +#define __ALIGN_STR ".align 32,0x90"
> +#else
> +#define __ALIGN_STR ".align 16,0x90"
> +#endif
> +#else

Please dont do this without doing a complete set of benchmarks on a variety
of machines. On the K7 at least the cache footprint seems to outweigh the
alignment values in general.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

• Next message: Manfred Spraul: "Re: [patch] smp-2.3.41-A1, (was: Re: BUG? i386 TLB Flushing)"
• Previous message: gokhan sozmen: "Re: i-node corruption -- who to contact?"
• In reply to: Chris Sears: "[PATCH] 2.3.40: <linux/linkage.h> generates incorrect cache alignments for 486 and above"
• Next in thread: Chris Sears: "Re: [PATCH] 2.3.40: <linux/linkage.h> generates incorrect cache alignments"
• Reply: Chris Sears: "Re: [PATCH] 2.3.40: <linux/linkage.h> generates incorrect cache alignments"
• Reply: Chris Sears: "Re: [PATCH] 2.3.40: <linux/linkage.h> generates incorrect cache alignments"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jan 27 2000 - 19:28:25 EST