From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
To: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
"Christophe Leroy" <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] powerpc: add support for csum_add()
Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 16:54:39 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1432331679.27761.278.camel@freescale.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150522213956.GC7305@gate.crashing.org>
On Fri, 2015-05-22 at 16:39 -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 02:32:42PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> > > I'd also have thought that the 64bit C version above would be generally 'good'.
> >
> > It doesn't generate the addc/addze sequence. At least with GCC 4.8.2,
> > it does something like:
> >
> > mr tmp0, csum
> > li tmp1, 0
> > li tmp2, 0
> > addc tmp3, addend, tmp0
> > adde csum, tmp2, tmp1
> > add csum, csum, tmp3
>
> Right. Don't expect older compilers to do sane things here.
>
> All this begs a question... If it is worth spending so much time
> micro-optimising this, why not pick the low-hanging fruit first?
> Having a 32-bit accumulator for ones' complement sums, on a 64-bit
> system, is not such a great idea.
That would be a more intrusive change -- not (comparatively) low-hanging
fruit. Plus, the person submitting these patches is focused on 32-bit.
-Scott
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-05-22 21:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-05-19 15:18 [PATCH v3 0/2] Optimise some IP checksum functions Christophe Leroy
2015-05-19 15:18 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] powerpc: put csum_tcpudp_magic inline Christophe Leroy
2015-05-19 15:18 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] powerpc: add support for csum_add() Christophe Leroy
2015-05-22 15:57 ` David Laight
2015-05-22 19:32 ` Scott Wood
2015-05-22 21:39 ` Segher Boessenkool
2015-05-22 21:54 ` Scott Wood [this message]
2015-05-26 13:57 ` David Laight
2015-05-26 19:42 ` Scott Wood
2015-05-27 8:41 ` David Laight
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=1432331679.27761.278.camel@freescale.com \
--to=scottwood@freescale.com \
--cc=David.Laight@ACULAB.COM \
--cc=christophe.leroy@c-s.fr \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=segher@kernel.crashing.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).