* Matt Mackall | 2011-06-14 17:05:40 [-0500]: >Ok, so you claim that ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN is not set on some >architectures, and thus SLOB does the wrong thing. > >Doesn't that rather obviously mean that the affected architectures >should define ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN? Because, well, they have an >"architecture-specific minimum kmalloc alignment"? nope, if nothing is defined SLOB asumes that alignment of long is the way go. Unfortunately alignment of u64 maybe larger than of u32. >This change will regress SLOB everywhere where '4' was the right answer. I doubt that 4 was the correct answer. On x86_32 you still get 4. Everything else might be miss-aligned for u64 types. Sebastian -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>