On Wed, 23 May 2007 12:20:05 -0700 Ravikiran G Thirumalai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 12:09:56PM -0700, Yu, Fenghua wrote: > > > > >Has there been any measurable benefit yet due to tail padding? > > > > We don't have data that tail padding actually helps. It all > > depends on what data the linker lays out in the cachelines. > > > > As of now we just want to create the infrastructure (so that > > more and more people who need it, can use it). > > So what we have now is space wastage on some architectures, space savings on > some, but with no measurable performance benefit due to the infrastructure > itself. Why not push the infrastructure when we really need it, as against > pushing it now when we are not sure if it benefits? > It makes sense from a theoretical POV and is pretty much a no-op in terms of resource consumption. The problem with the wait-until-it-hurts approach is that by the time someone hurts from this and we find out about it, they may well be using some year-old enterprise kernel and it's too late to fix it for them. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
