On 01/05/2011 06:58 AM, [email protected] wrote: > Perhaps not the biggest deal, but I do like to get low-hanging fixes out > of the way if they appear. > > One very significant item I found. It appears GCC is fine with %rbx being > clobbered when building PIC in 64-bit mode, even though it has problems > with %ebx being clobbered when building PIC in 32-bit mode. > > This patch only increases the number of possible ways preprocessor defines can be resolved, which in turn increases the maintenance cost. Restoring %ebx/%rbx unconditionally is cheap. Maintaining exponentially growing number of the way #if's can be resolved isn't. I don't see any problem to enduser with these 2 small instructions always being there. > One other item I did notice. Are there really any processors in the amd64 > class that *don't* support CPUID? I'd like to hardcode > grub_cpu_is_cpuid_supported() to return 1 if __x86_64__ is defined, but > I'm a tad worried I'll be unpleasantly surprised. > > Similar problems. Maintaining something that is always the same is easier than something with loads of #if's. Rule of thumb is: "if it works and your improvement isn't visible to any enduser, don't touch it". > > > > _______________________________________________ > Grub-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel >
-- Regards Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
