lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Sep]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Immediate values
Jason Baron wrote:
>
> right we've proposed an alternative to the immediate values, which I've
> been calling 'jump label', here:
>
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=125200966226921&w=2
>
> The basic idea is that gcc, 4.5 will have support for an 'asm goto'
> construct which can refer to c code labels. Thus, we can replace a nop
> in the code stream with a 'jmp' instruction to various branch targets.
>
> In terms of a comparison between the two, IMO, I think that the syntax
> for the immediate variables can be more readable, since it just looks
> like a conditional expression.
>
> The immediate values do a 'mov', 'test' and then a jump, whereas jump
> label can just do a jump. So in this respect, I believe jump label can
> be more optimal. Additinally, if we want to mark sections 'cold' so they
> don't impact the istruction cache, the jump label already has the labels
> for doing so. Obviously, a performance comparison would be interesting
> as well.
>

Direct jumps should at least theoretically be able to have better
performance, but it would still be nice to have measurements of both.

-hpa



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-09-24 16:15    [W:1.229 / U:0.680 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site