Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 1 Feb 2001 00:12:28 -0800 (PST) | From | Andre Hedrick <> |
| |
Make it and I will care and post it on kernel.org for you. I need that patch soon.
On Thu, 1 Feb 2001, Tom Leete wrote:
> Alan Cox wrote: > > > > > It's not an incompatibility with the k7 chip, just bad code in > > > include/asm-i386/string.h. in_interrupt() cannot be called from there. > > > > The string.h code was fine, someone came along and put in a ridiculous loop > > in the include dependancies and broke it. Nobody has had the time to untangle > > it cleanly since > > Yes, bitrot. I don't see a rearrangement of system headers happening in 2.4. > I'm pretty sure if I committed such a patch it would have no measurable > lifetime. > > > > > > I have posted a patch here many times since last May. Most recent was > > > Saturday. > > > > uninlining the code is too high a cost. > > I question that. Athlon does branch prediction on call targets, function > calls are cheap. 3dnow saves 25%-50% of cycles on a copy. How many function > calls can be paid for with 1000 cycles or so? > > My patch still inlines the standard string const_memcpy for the case of > small known length. > > If I configure SMP for a UP box, performance is clearly not my first > concern. If I have a real SMP Athlon system, performance should not improve > by only using one processor. > > How about we get it to build before we optimize it? > > Regards, > Tom > > -- > The Daemons lurk and are dumb. -- Emerson > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ >
Andre Hedrick Linux ATA Development
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |