[concurrency-interest] padding in Exchanger

√iktor Ҡlang viktor.klang at gmail.com
Tue Jan 17 08:01:49 EST 2012


On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 1:56 PM, Doug Lea <dl at cs.oswego.edu> wrote:

> 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.


What is the outlook for getting the contended annotation in the java spec?

Cheers,
√


>
> -Doug
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Concurrency-interest mailing list
> Concurrency-interest at cs.**oswego.edu <Concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu>
> http://cs.oswego.edu/mailman/**listinfo/concurrency-interest<http://cs.oswego.edu/mailman/listinfo/concurrency-interest>
>



-- 
Viktor Klang

Akka Tech Lead
Typesafe <http://www.typesafe.com/> - The software stack for applications
that scale

Twitter: @viktorklang
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cs.oswego.edu/pipermail/concurrency-interest/attachments/20120117/5512e83a/attachment.html>


More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list