From: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
To: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [X86] PCI: Use generic cacheline sizing instead of per-vendor tests.
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 17:37:42 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091014213742.GA17311@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091014143054.76874f30@jbarnes-g45>
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 02:30:54PM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Oct 2009 16:31:39 -0400
> Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > Instead of the PCI code needing to have code to determine the
> > cacheline size of each processor, use the data the cpu identification
> > code should have already determined during early boot.
> >
> > (The vendor checks are also incomplete, and don't take into account
> > modern CPUs)
> >
> > I've been carrying a variant of this code in Fedora for a while,
> > that prints debug information. There are a number of cases where we
> > are currently setting the PCI cacheline size to 32 bytes, when the CPU
> > cacheline size is 64 bytes. With this patch, we set them both the
> > same.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
> >
>
> Does this improve performance enough to warrant putting it into the
> current cycle? Or is queuing it for 2.6.33 sufficient?
I haven't done any performance testing with/without. My intentions
were purely from a correctness standpoint.
It's not critical, and we've lived with this bug for a long time,
so waiting is fine.
Dave
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-14 21:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-14 20:31 [X86] PCI: Use generic cacheline sizing instead of per-vendor tests Dave Jones
2009-10-14 21:30 ` Jesse Barnes
2009-10-14 21:37 ` Dave Jones [this message]
2009-10-15 0:51 ` Dave Jones
2009-10-26 20:39 ` Jesse Barnes
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=20091014213742.GA17311@redhat.com \
--to=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org \
--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