From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Kyle McMartin <kyle@mcmartin.ca>,
tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: make clflush a required feature on x86_64
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 15:18:39 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080118141839.GA16738@one.firstfloor.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4790B01B.8020406@zytor.com>
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 08:56:43AM -0500, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Andi Kleen wrote:
> >>Simulators can be fixed,
> >
> >They could, but why? I don't know of a good reason to require CLFLUSH.
>
> Well, simulators are generally expected to follow the architecture, not
> vice versa. I would tend to agree with the coupling that recent
> versions of Bochs appeared to have made here -- I think we're unlikely
> to see any processors with sse2 sans clflush, so keeping code branches
> in which will never be executed seems like a bad idea in the long term.
Here's another argument: Ingo just asked me to add a noclflush option
to the code. Guess what check that option will need?
Besides compared to the cost of a flushing clflush the branches are absolutely
in the noise.
-Andi
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-01-18 14:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-01-18 4:59 [PATCH] x86: make clflush a required feature on x86_64 Kyle McMartin
2008-01-18 5:04 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-01-18 5:25 ` [PATCH] x86_64: remove redundant cpu_has_ definitions Kyle McMartin
2008-01-18 8:07 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-18 5:53 ` [PATCH] x86: make clflush a required feature on x86_64 Andi Kleen
2008-01-18 6:01 ` Kyle McMartin
2008-01-18 6:27 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-01-11 18:16 ` Pavel Machek
2008-01-18 6:54 ` Andi Kleen
2008-01-18 13:56 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-01-18 14:18 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080118141839.GA16738@one.firstfloor.org \
--to=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=kyle@mcmartin.ca \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.