From: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@cl.cam.ac.uk>
To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
Cc: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
Xen Mailing List <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>,
linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
Tony Breeds <tony@bakeyournoodle.com>,
djm@kirby.fc.hp.com,
David Mosberger-Tang <David.Mosberger@acm.org>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] __ia64__ ifdef in xmalloc.c: "Fix ar.unat handling forfast paths"
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 15:37:07 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <883776988128f1657bc6dbd7d993cae1@cl.cam.ac.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <B8E391BBE9FE384DAA4C5C003888BE6F05080A09@scsmsx401.amr.corp.intel.com>
On 23 Nov 2005, at 15:07, Luck, Tony wrote:
>> It's not hard to support arbitrary alignment, at the cost of burning
>> some space. We should probably do that.
>
> The "we" in that last sentence is the Xen team ... referring
> to making fixes to xmalloc?
Correct. But I've thought more on it and I guess that actually the
number of cases where we have structures with alignment requirements
stricter than SMP_CACHE_BYTES will be very small. In fact I can't think
of any in Xen right now. :-)
So it makes most sense for ia64 Xen to define SMP_CACHE_BYTES to a
sensible largeish number irrespective of CONFIG_SMP (after all, how
many uniproc ia64 systems are there), and solve the general alignment
problem in xmalloc only if we really need to.
-- Keir
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-11-23 15:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1132548798.1478.7.camel@localhost.localdomain>
2005-11-22 4:44 ` [Xen-devel] __ia64__ ifdef in xmalloc.c: "Fix ar.unat handling forfast paths" Tian, Kevin
2005-11-22 16:11 ` Luck, Tony
2005-11-22 19:34 ` David Mosberger-Tang
2005-11-23 2:52 ` Tian, Kevin
2005-11-23 2:58 ` Tian, Kevin
2005-11-23 8:54 ` Keir Fraser
2005-11-23 16:30 ` David Mosberger-Tang
2005-11-23 15:07 ` Luck, Tony
2005-11-23 15:37 ` Keir Fraser [this message]
2005-11-23 23:22 ` [Xen-devel] __ia64__ ifdef in xmalloc.c: "Fix ar.unat handling Rusty Russell
2005-11-23 17:49 ` [Xen-devel] __ia64__ ifdef in xmalloc.c: "Fix ar.unat handling forfast paths" Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)
2005-11-24 7:01 ` Luck, Tony
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=883776988128f1657bc6dbd7d993cae1@cl.cam.ac.uk \
--to=keir.fraser@cl.cam.ac.uk \
--cc=David.Mosberger@acm.org \
--cc=djm@kirby.fc.hp.com \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=tony@bakeyournoodle.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox