Re: [RFC] Documentation about unaligned memory access

dean gaudet <[email protected]> writes:
> on AMD x86 pre-family 10h the boundary is 8 bytes, and on fam 10h it's 16 
> bytes.  the penalty is a mere 3 cycles if an access crosses the specified 
> boundary.

Worth noting though, is that atomic accesses that cross cache lines on
an Opteron system is going to lock down the Hypertransport fabric for
you during the operation -- which is obviously not so nice.

-- 
								Arne.
-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [RFC] Documentation about unaligned memory access
    • From: dean gaudet <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [RFC] Documentation about unaligned memory access
    • From: Daniel Drake <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC] Documentation about unaligned memory access
    • From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC] Documentation about unaligned memory access
    • From: dean gaudet <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 2.6.24-rc3-mm1] IPC: make struct ipc_ids static in ipc_namespace
• Next by Date: [GIT PULL] Blackfin arch bug fixing and cleanup
• Previous by thread: Re: [RFC] Documentation about unaligned memory access
• Next by thread: Re: [RFC] Documentation about unaligned memory access
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]