[concurrency-interest] padding in Exchanger

Doug Lea dl at cs.oswego.edu
Tue Jan 17 07:56:34 EST 2012

On 01/17/12 07:47, Ruslan Cheremin wrote:
> Yes, I understand. I do not understand why -- in current conditions --
> 128 bytes padding is better then 64 bytes one. Both are not
> bulletproof, and 64 bytes seems to be enough for arch with 64 cache
> line...

Several common processors (including Intel i7s) are normally run in
128byte cache line mode. There are also a few less common processors
such as recent POWER that normally run with even larger cache lines,
but until we get better JVM support, the best we can do is target
the most common cases.


More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list