lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Oct]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 6/7] arm64, jump label: optimize jump label implementation
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 06:11:45PM +0100, Jiang Liu wrote:
> On 10/16/2013 07:46 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
> >
> >> + } else {
> >> + insn = aarch64_insn_gen_nop();
> >
> > You could make the code more concise by limiting your patching ability to
> > branch immediates. Then a nop is simply a branch to the next instruction (I
> > doubt any modern CPUs will choke on this, whereas the architecture requires
> > a NOP to take time).
> I guess a NOP should be more effecient than a "B #4" on real CPUs:)

Well, I was actually questioning that. A NOP *has* to take time (the
architecture prevents implementations from discaring it) whereas a static,
unconditional branch will likely be discarded early on by CPUs with even
simple branch prediction logic.

Will


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-10-17 12:01    [W:0.043 / U:9.900 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site