From: R.E.Wolff@BitWizard.nl (Rogier Wolff)
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: kmalloc() alignment
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 09:31:01 +0100 (MET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200103060831.JAA04492@cave.bitwizard.nl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <981a78$cb2$1@cesium.transmeta.com> from "H. Peter Anvin" at "Mar 5, 2001 04:15:36 pm"
> Followup to: <20010306000652.A13992@excalibur.research.wombat.ie>
> By author: Kenn Humborg <kenn@linux.ie>
> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 04, 2001 at 11:41:12PM +0100, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Does kmalloc() make any guarantees of the alignment of allocated
> > > > blocks? Will the returned block always be 4-, 8- or 16-byte
> > > > aligned, for example?
> > > >
> > >
> > > 4-byte alignment is guaranteed on 32-bit cpus, 8-byte alignment on
> > > 64-bit cpus.
> >
> > So, to summarise (for 32-bit CPUs):
> >
> > o Alan Cox & Manfred Spraul say 4-byte alignment is guaranteed.
> >
> > o If you need larger alignment, you need to alloc a larger space,
> > round as necessary, and keep the original pointer for kfree()
> >
> > Maybe I'll just use get_free_pages, since it's a 64KB chunk that
> > I need (and it's only a once-off).
My old kmalloc would actually use n+10 bytes if you request n bytes.
As memory comes in pools of powers of two, if you request 64k, you
would acutaly use 128k of memory. If you use "get_free_pages", you'll
not have the overhead, and actually allocate the 64k you need.
I'm not sure what the slab stuff does...
Roger.
--
** R.E.Wolff@BitWizard.nl ** http://www.BitWizard.nl/ ** +31-15-2137555 **
*-- BitWizard writes Linux device drivers for any device you may have! --*
* There are old pilots, and there are bold pilots.
* There are also old, bald pilots.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-03-06 8:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-03-04 22:41 kmalloc() alignment Manfred Spraul
2001-03-06 0:06 ` Kenn Humborg
2001-03-06 0:15 ` H. Peter Anvin
2001-03-06 0:29 ` Kenn Humborg
2001-03-06 2:14 ` Alan Cox
2001-03-06 5:05 ` H. Peter Anvin
2001-03-06 8:31 ` Rogier Wolff [this message]
2001-03-06 12:10 ` Xavier Bestel
2001-03-07 7:53 ` RAID, 2.4.2 and Buslogic Jauder Ho
2001-03-07 8:20 ` Andreas Dilger
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-05-05 22:03 kmalloc alignment Thomas Heinz
2001-03-04 22:17 kmalloc() alignment Kenn Humborg
2001-03-04 22:34 ` Alan Cox
2001-03-05 9:40 ` Rogier Wolff
2001-03-05 13:24 ` Alan Cox
2001-03-05 13:22 ` Rogier Wolff
2001-03-06 8:59 ` Philipp Rumpf
2001-03-06 12:14 ` Alan Cox
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=200103060831.JAA04492@cave.bitwizard.nl \
--to=r.e.wolff@bitwizard.nl \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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