>
> I would not abstract the 'if' statement. If CL_PREDICT_FALSE/TRUE are not
> readable, then shorten those.
>
> if (PF(...))
>
> is just as readable as
>
> if_PF(...)
OK, agree.
I'll issue a v2 shortly - the only difference would be
change in this macro and rebase to the updated trunk.
--
> On 8/15/2012 12:54 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 09:39:23PM +, Hefty, Sean wrote:
> >>> +#define if_PF(cond) if(CL_PREDICT_FALSE(cond))
> >>> +#define if_PT(cond) if(CL_PREDICT_TRUE(cond))
> >>
> >> If CL_PREDICT_TRUE/FALSE are too long, why
On 8/26/2012 4:43 PM, Yevgeny Kliteynik wrote:
>
>> If you are typing these so often (ie more than in some datastructure
>> kernels) that the length is a problem then you really should be using
>> profile guided optimization instead...
>
> I'm trying to optimize all the 'if' conditions in the SM.
Hi,
Sorry for the delay with a response - just got back from a long vacation.
On 8/15/2012 12:54 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 09:39:23PM +, Hefty, Sean wrote:
>>> +#define if_PF(cond)if(CL_PREDICT_FALSE(cond))
>>> +#define if_PT(cond)if(
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 09:39:23PM +, Hefty, Sean wrote:
> > +#define if_PF(cond)if(CL_PREDICT_FALSE(cond))
> > +#define if_PT(cond)if(CL_PREDICT_TRUE(cond))
>
> If CL_PREDICT_TRUE/FALSE are too long, why not just shorten those,
> rather than abstract if stateme
> +#define if_PF(cond) if(CL_PREDICT_FALSE(cond))
> +#define if_PT(cond) if(CL_PREDICT_TRUE(cond))
If CL_PREDICT_TRUE/FALSE are too long, why not just shorten those, rather than
abstract if statements behind a macro?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe l
