On Sun, 25 Jun 2017, Kees Cook wrote: > The difference gets lost in the noise, but if the above is sensible, > it's 0.07% slower. ;) Hmmm... These differences add up. Also in a repetative benchmark like that you do not see the impact that the additional cacheline use in the cpu cache has on larger workloads. Those may be pushed over the edge of l1 or l2 capacity at some point which then causes drastic regressions. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
