Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] net drivers and cache alignment

From: Andrew Morton <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 15:42:00 -0800

"David S. Miller" wrote:
> 
>    From: Andrew Morton <[email-masked]>
>    Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 15:29:16 -0800
> 
>    Jeff Garzik wrote:
>    > Attached is cut #2.  Thanks for all the near-instant feedback so far :)
>    >   Andrew, does the attached still need padding on SMP?
> 
>    It needs padding _only_ on SMP.  ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp.
> 
> non-smp machines lack L2 caches?  That's new to me :-)
> 
> More seriously, there are real benefits on non-SMP systems.

Then I am most confused.  None of these fields will be put under
busmastering or anything like that, so what advantage is there in
spreading them out?