On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 4:36 AM, Torvald Riegel <trie...@redhat.com> wrote: > 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.
So where did you get the values used in the PowerPC port of ITM? - David
