Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2012 14:08:14 +0400 From: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org> To: Attilio Rao <attilio@FreeBSD.org> Cc: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, Ian Lepore <freebsd@damnhippie.dyndns.org>, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r242402 - in head/sys: kern vm Message-ID: <20121101100814.GB70741@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <CAJ-FndC7QwpNAjzQTumqTY6Sj_RszXPwc0pbHv2-pRGMqbw0ww@mail.gmail.com> References: <201210311807.q9VI7IcX000993@svn.freebsd.org> <CAJ-FndDRkBS57e9mzZoJWX5ugJ0KBGxhMSO50KB8Wm8MFudjCA@mail.gmail.com> <1351707964.1120.97.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> <CAJ-FndC7QwpNAjzQTumqTY6Sj_RszXPwc0pbHv2-pRGMqbw0ww@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 06:33:51PM +0000, Attilio Rao wrote: A> > Doesn't this padding to cache line size only help x86 processors in an A> > SMP kernel? I was expecting to see some #ifdef SMP so that we don't pay A> > a big price for no gain in small-memory ARM systems and such. But maybe A> > I'm misunderstanding the reason for the padding. A> A> I didn't want to do this because this would be meaning that SMP option A> may become a completely killer for modules/kernel ABI compatibility. Do we support loading non-SMP modules on SMP kernel and vice versa? -- Totus tuus, Glebius.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20121101100814.GB70741>