[lkml]   [2010]   [May]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] x86: eliminate TS_XSAVE
On 05/04/2010 09:24 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> I would like to request one change, however. I would like to see the
> alternatives code to be:
> movb $0,reg
> movb $1,reg
> ... instead of using xor (which has to be padded with NOPs, which is of
> course pointless since the slot is a fixed size.)


> I would suggest using
> a byte-sized variable instead of a dword-size variable to save a few
> bytes, too.

I used a bool, and the code already compiles to a byte mov. Though it
could be argued that a word instruction is better since it avoids a
false dependency, and allows a preceding instruction that modifies %reg
to be executed after the mov instruction.

> Once the jump label framework is integrated and has matured, I think we
> should consider using it to save the mov/test/jump.

IIRC that has an implied unlikely() which isn't suitable here?

Perhaps the immediate values patches.

error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

 \ /
  Last update: 2010-05-05 09:33    [W:0.056 / U:30.556 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site