Carsten Langgaard wrote: > > "Gleb O. Raiko" wrote: > > Basically, requirement of uncached run makes hadrware logic much simpler > > and allows to save silicon a bit. > > That could be true, but then again I suggest making specific cache routines for those > CPUs. > It would be a real performance hit for the rest of us, if we have to operate from > uncached space. > In theory, yes, there is a performance penalty. In practice, I doubt this penalty is significant. Sure, Linux likes to flush cahces, not to say more. But, did somebody measure the penalty of uncached runs? Even with microbencnmarks like lmbench. Regards, Gleb.
