Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 22 Feb 2012 07:11:21 -0800 | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 00/10] jump label: introduce very_[un]likely + cleanups + docs |
| |
On 02/22/2012 06:56 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > >> maybe even a "very_likely()", but then keep a static_branch() >> or whatever for those cases you do not want to optimize at >> compile time. > > Once such uses arise maybe we could add such an 'unbiased' > variant. >
We already have such use cases, although a lot of them are covered by static_cpu_has(). However, I fully expect that we'll have cases that aren't readily covered by CPU feature flags and I'd like to avoid reinventing new features.
-hpa
-- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
| |