From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753022Ab3AUMTq (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Jan 2013 07:19:46 -0500 Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.122]:3499 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752015Ab3AUMTp (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Jan 2013 07:19:45 -0500 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=W/m6pGqk c=1 sm=0 a=rXTBtCOcEpjy1lPqhTCpEQ==:17 a=mNMOxpOpBa8A:10 a=HJMuRcDKq34A:10 a=5SG0PmZfjMsA:10 a=Q9fys5e9bTEA:10 a=meVymXHHAAAA:8 a=RPfT3mj6-UMA:10 a=CTUGp7iZEgvoeRujTgQA:9 a=PUjeQqilurYA:10 a=rXTBtCOcEpjy1lPqhTCpEQ==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Authenticated-User: X-Originating-IP: 74.67.115.198 Message-ID: <1358770782.23981.8.camel@gandalf.local.home> Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v2] slub: Keep page and object in sync in slab_alloc_node() From: Steven Rostedt To: Joonsoo Kim Cc: Christoph Lameter , LKML , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Pekka Enberg , Matt Mackall , Thomas Gleixner , RT , Clark Williams , John Kacur , "Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 07:19:42 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20130121081121.GA3936@lge.com> References: <1358458996.23211.46.camel@gandalf.local.home> <0000013c4a7e7fbf-c51fd42a-2455-4fec-bb37-915035956f05-000000@email.amazonses.com> <1358462763.23211.57.camel@gandalf.local.home> <1358464245.23211.62.camel@gandalf.local.home> <1358464837.23211.66.camel@gandalf.local.home> <1358468598.23211.67.camel@gandalf.local.home> <1358468924.23211.69.camel@gandalf.local.home> <0000013c4e1ea131-b8ab56b9-bfca-44fe-b5da-f030551194c9-000000@email.amazonses.com> <1358521484.7383.8.camel@gandalf.local.home> <1358524501.7383.17.camel@gandalf.local.home> <20130121081121.GA3936@lge.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.4.4-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2013-01-21 at 17:11 +0900, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > Hello. > I have one stupid question just for curiosity. > Does the processor re-order instructions which load data from same cacheline? > Probably not, but I wouldn't have generic code assuming cacheline sizes. -- Steve