On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 13:30:32 +0100 Marc Pignat <marc.pignat@hevs.ch> wrote:Ok, sorry about that. I agree, so I replaced it with a comment. Ok, but then any power of two larger than the cache line size should be fine, assuming kmalloc() returns a properly aligned buffer. Other than that, I can't see any reason why a platform with 64 byte cache lines should need larger buffers than one with 32 byte cache lines. There are still issues with the DMA code that the PIO code doesn't have. So I think it should be selectable until we can sort out the error/break handling. Haavard --
| Ian Campbell | Re: [PATCH] x86: Construct 32 bit boot time page tables in native format. |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 001/196] Chinese: Add the known_regression URI to the HOWTO |
| Justin Piszcz | Linux Software RAID 5 Performance Optimizations: 2.6.19.1: (211MB/s read & 195... |
| Alan | Re: [RFC] Heads up on sys_fallocate() |
| Matthias Scheler | Re: HEADS UP: timecounters (branch simonb-timecounters) merged into -current |
| David Laight | long usernames |
| Quentin Garnier | Re: Understanding foo_open, foo_read, etc. |
| Jared D. McNeill | Breaking binary compatibility for /dev/joy |
git: | |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 0/37] dccp: Feature negotiation - last call for comments |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| Natalie Protasevich | [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
