Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list netdev); Sat, 07 Dec 2002 15:30:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pizda.ninka.net (IDENT:root@pizda.ninka.net [216.101.162.242])
	by oss.sgi.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with SMTP id gB7NUbuR018504
	for <netdev@oss.sgi.com>; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 15:30:37 -0800
Received: from localhost (IDENT:davem@localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by pizda.ninka.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA03608;
	Sat, 7 Dec 2002 15:30:45 -0800
Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 15:30:45 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <20021207.153045.26640406.davem@redhat.com>
To: akpm@digeo.com
Cc: jgarzik@pobox.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] net drivers and cache alignment
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <3DF2844C.F9216283@digeo.com>
References: <20021207.144004.45605764.davem@redhat.com>
	<3DF27EE7.4010508@pobox.com>
	<3DF2844C.F9216283@digeo.com>
X-FalunGong: Information control.
X-Mailer: Mew version 2.1 on Emacs 21.1 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-archive-position: 1325
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com
Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com
X-original-sender: davem@redhat.com
Precedence: bulk
X-list: netdev
Content-Length: 432
Lines: 13

   From: Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>
   Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 15:29:16 -0800

   Jeff Garzik wrote:
   > Attached is cut #2.  Thanks for all the near-instant feedback so far :)
   >   Andrew, does the attached still need padding on SMP?
   
   It needs padding _only_ on SMP.  ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp.
   
non-smp machines lack L2 caches?  That's new to me :-)

More seriously, there are real benefits on non-SMP systems.