On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 21:41 -0500, David Edelsohn wrote: > On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 8:05 PM, Richard Henderson <r...@redhat.com> wrote: > > This is a tad rough, but not too bad. > > Cool. > > Maybe I don't understand what they are suppose to represent, but why > the choice of values for cacheline size? Is that suppose to be a > value chosen by ITM or suppose to be the hardware cacheline used as > the granularity for transactions?
CACHELINE_SIZE is supposed to be a the size of hardware cachelines so that we can add proper padding to shared variables to avoid false sharing. It also was used as the granularity of transactional access by some TM methods that aren't part of libitm currently, but might be revived in the future. Torvald
