public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "yann at droneaud dot fr" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/57908] alignment of arrays allocated stack on amd64/x86_64: 16 bytes ?
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2013 15:56:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-57908-4-bS9ctl2o7t@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-57908-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57908

--- Comment #10 from Yann Droneaud <yann at droneaud dot fr> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #9)
> (In reply to Yann Droneaud from comment #8)
> > Could someone comment on which optimisation is achieved by aligning such
> > small arrays ?
> 
> The simple answer is so each array is more likely to fit into a cache line:
>    One use of this macro is to increase alignment of medium-size
>    data to make it all fit in fewer cache lines.  */

Thanks for the investigation.

Initially I thought it would be better to "pack" such arrays to fit whole cache
line: fewer cache lines will be used and most of the arrays would be already in
cache lines.

But according to http://stackoverflow.com/a/7281770:

"On x86 cache lines are 64 bytes, however, to prevent false sharing, you need
to follow the guidelines of the processor you are targeting (intel has some
special notes on its netburst based processors), generally you need to align to
64 bytes for this (intel states that you should also avoid crossing 16 byte
boundries)."

This start to make sense to me.

I'm likely buying the argument for global variables but for local variables, I
think they are probably not going to be shared a lot across CPUs. But I haven't
data for this so I won't continue that way.

Thanks a lot for answer my question.


      parent reply	other threads:[~2013-07-16 15:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-07-16 14:35 [Bug c/57908] New: " yann at droneaud dot fr
2013-07-16 14:39 ` [Bug c/57908] " yann at droneaud dot fr
2013-07-16 15:03 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-07-16 15:06 ` [Bug target/57908] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-07-16 15:11 ` yann at droneaud dot fr
2013-07-16 15:18 ` yann at droneaud dot fr
2013-07-16 15:20 ` yann at droneaud dot fr
2013-07-16 15:28 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-07-16 15:32 ` yann at droneaud dot fr
2013-07-16 15:36 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-07-16 15:56 ` yann at droneaud dot fr [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bug-57908-4-bS9ctl2o7t@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).