Re: [PATCH] add new DMA_ADDR_T_SIZE define

From: Ion Badulescu (ionut@badula.org)
Date: Wed Feb 19 2003 - 17:53:02 EST


On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, David S. Miller wrote:

> Yes true, storing the two consequetive 32-bit values is better
> for store buffer compression of the cpu. Using memset is much
> more inefficient because you push the full set of data once
> then you push non-compressible stores to the same data through
> the cpu.
>
> I'm not talking out of my ass, I've measured this.

So is the current wisdom something like "always treat dma_addr_t as a u64
and be happy"?

Ion

-- 
  It is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool,
            than to open it and remove all doubt.

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Feb 23 2003 - 22:00:27 EST