On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 11:12:05AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> So if one or two cycles in this code doesn't matter, then why are we
> adding alternate instructions just to avoid a few ALU instructions and
> a conditional branch that predicts perfectly? And if it does matter,
> then the 6-byte option looks clearly better..
You know what? I haven't even measured the tree *without* Denys'
stricter RCX canonical-ness patch. All numbers so far are from 4.0+ with
tip/master ontop which has Denys' patch.
And I *should* measure once with plain 4.1-rc1 and then with Denys'
patch ontop to see whether this all jumping-thru-alternatives-hoops is
even worth it.
If nothing else, it was a nice exercise. :-)
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
