On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 04:20:15PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 04/29/2011 04:15 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote: >>> > * cxx_binding should be 16 bytes, not 20. >> >> Not your fault, but comments like this on SpeedupAreas are so opaque as >> to be useless. *Why* should cxx_binding be 16 bytes? Should we take >> the next member out and have a VEC someplace instead of chaining? Are >> we duplicating information in the members themselves? Etc. > > Sorry, you're right. It's about cache lines I guess, and moving the > bitfields into one of the pointers.
Gross. :) -Nathan