On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 2:33 PM Nick Desaulniers
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 1:42 PM Nick Desaulniers
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 11:39 PM Christophe Leroy
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > As you can see, CLANG doesn't save/restore 'lr' allthought 'lr' is
> > > explicitely listed in t
On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 1:42 PM Nick Desaulniers
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 11:39 PM Christophe Leroy
> wrote:
> >
> > As you can see, CLANG doesn't save/restore 'lr' allthought 'lr' is
> > explicitely listed in the
> > registers clobbered by the inline assembly:
>
> Ah, thanks for debug
On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 11:39 PM Christophe Leroy
wrote:
>
>
>
> Le 26/04/2021 à 20:50, Nathan Chancellor a écrit :
> > On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 11:22:27PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> >> From: Christophe Leroy
> >>
> >> call_do_irq() and call_do_softirq() are simple enough to be
> >> worth in
Le 26/04/2021 à 20:50, Nathan Chancellor a écrit :
On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 11:22:27PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
From: Christophe Leroy
call_do_irq() and call_do_softirq() are simple enough to be
worth inlining.
Inlining them avoids an mflr/mtlr pair plus a save/reload on stack. It
als
On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 11:22:27PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> From: Christophe Leroy
>
> call_do_irq() and call_do_softirq() are simple enough to be
> worth inlining.
>
> Inlining them avoids an mflr/mtlr pair plus a save/reload on stack. It
> also allows GCC to keep the saved ksp_limit in
On Sat, 20 Mar 2021 23:22:27 +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> call_do_irq() and call_do_softirq() are simple enough to be
> worth inlining.
>
> Inlining them avoids an mflr/mtlr pair plus a save/reload on stack. It
> also allows GCC to keep the saved ksp_limit in an nonvolatile reg.
>
> This is i
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 11:26:01PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Christophe Leroy writes:
> > Hmm. It is the first time we use named parameters in powerpc assembly,
> > isn't it ?
> Yeah I'd like us to use it more, I think it helps readability a lot.
..in some cases. Not in most cases :-(
Christophe Leroy writes:
> Le 20/03/2021 à 13:22, Michael Ellerman a écrit :
>> From: Christophe Leroy
>>
>> call_do_irq() and call_do_softirq() are simple enough to be
>> worth inlining.
>>
>> Inlining them avoids an mflr/mtlr pair plus a save/reload on stack. It
>> also allows GCC to keep the
Le 20/03/2021 à 13:22, Michael Ellerman a écrit :
From: Christophe Leroy
call_do_irq() and call_do_softirq() are simple enough to be
worth inlining.
Inlining them avoids an mflr/mtlr pair plus a save/reload on stack. It
also allows GCC to keep the saved ksp_limit in an nonvolatile reg.
We
From: Christophe Leroy
call_do_irq() and call_do_softirq() are simple enough to be
worth inlining.
Inlining them avoids an mflr/mtlr pair plus a save/reload on stack. It
also allows GCC to keep the saved ksp_limit in an nonvolatile reg.
This is inspired from S390 arch. Several other arches do m
10 matches
Mail list logo