Re: Word-at-a-time dcache name accesses (was Re: .. anybody know ofany filesystems that depend on the exact VFS 'namehash' implementation?)

[david]

On Fri, 2 Mar 2012, Ted Ts'o wrote:

> Stupid question.  Your patch requires unaligned accesses to not have a
> heavy penalty, right?  Wasn't it the case that some generations of x86
> had pretty large penalties for aligned accesses?  Is that something we
> need to worry about?

another stupid question

since the code that it's replaceing did byte-at-a-time access, wouldn't 
that be at least as bad as the new code?

or did some CPUs have efficient char access, but inefficient unaligned 
word access?

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