Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 20 May 2008 17:57:37 +0200 (CEST) | From | Soumyadip Das Mahapatra <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] bitreversal program |
| |
On Tue, 20 May 2008, Benoit Boissinot wrote:
> On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 5:25 PM, Soumyadip Das Mahapatra > <kernelhacker@visualserver.org> wrote: >> Thanks for giving a reply Akinobu :-) >> I forgot that bitrev8() is static in header file. Sorry for that. >> >> Below is my new patch considering this. Cant it be applicable? >> Please review it. >> >> I know that my bitrev8() takes more instructions than that >> of yours. But we have to think about faster access of cpu cache over that >> of memory cache(which your bit_rev_table uses). > > I didn't review your patch, sorry. > But I'm pretty sure that your patch won't be considered unless you > provide benchmarks > with numbers for different CPU/architecture. > Ideally you should provide a script to test the correctness and the > performance of your > change that anyone could run on his computer.
Thanks Benoit for giving me such a precious advice. But sorry, I dont have any benchmarking system in my hand(how can i have? i am just a student, not a professional). So if you do me a favour and kindly do it for me, please :-)
Anyway thanks again.
Soumya
-- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
| |