From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:34:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:33:59 -0400 Received: from penguin.e-mind.com ([195.223.140.120]:23328 "EHLO penguin.e-mind.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:33:55 -0400 Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 01:33:56 +0200 From: Andrea Arcangeli To: Andrew Morton Cc: Mark Hemment , Juergen Doelle , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Align VM locks Message-ID: <20010817013356.E8726@athlon.random> In-Reply-To: , ; <20010816202606.B8726@athlon.random> <3B7C1B8F.708CBB9@zip.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3B7C1B8F.708CBB9@zip.com.au>; from akpm@zip.com.au on Thu, Aug 16, 2001 at 12:14:23PM -0700 X-GnuPG-Key-URL: http://e-mind.com/~andrea/aa.gnupg.asc X-PGP-Key-URL: http://e-mind.com/~andrea/aa.asc Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 16, 2001 at 12:14:23PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > Problem with this approach is that it doesn't prevent the linker > from placing other data in the same cacheline as the aligned > lock, at higher addresses. that was partly intentional, but ok we can be more aggressive on that side ;). > Juergen, I'd suggest you dust off that patch, add the conditionals > which make it a no-op on uniprocessor and submit it. It's such a agreed, btw it is just a noop on up but it is undefined for __GNUC__ > 2, also it would be nice if he could do it in linux/ instead of asm/, it should not need special arch trick (spinlock_t and SMP_CACHE_SIZE are the only thing it needs). Andrea