From: David Ahern <dsah...@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 08:22:04 -0700
> On 12/10/18 10:59 PM, David Miller wrote: >> From: David Ahern <dsah...@gmail.com> >> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 19:47:33 -0700 >> >>> On 12/7/18 4:45 PM, David Miller wrote: >>>> >>>> Right, neigh->ha[] should probably be kept 8-byte aligned. >>>> >>> >>> From what I can see ha is only used with memcpy, and neighbour struct is >>> annotated with __randomize_layout. Are you saying that ha should be >>> marked with __aligned(8)? >> >> People who care about performance probably don't build with randomization >> enabled, do they? >> >> Even though it uses memcpy() it will be faster if it is 8 byte aligned >> and we can probably explicitly take advantage of that alignment even >> more if we add the marking as you suggest perhaps. >> >> Given all of this, what is your opinion? >> > > Arguably my take is ethernet centric. I do not see how 8-byte alignment > matters when copying 6 bytes. In my response to Eric I showed ha is > still 4-byte aligned and does not straddle cachelines. Those seem the > more relevant to me. Ok, please resubmit as-is if you like.
