From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2008 11:08:55 +0100 From: Willy Tarreau To: Andrew Pinski Subject: Re: [Cbe-oss-dev] [PATCH 1/3] Fix Unlikely(x) == y Message-ID: <20080217100855.GA5135@1wt.eu> References: <47B70A61.9030306@tiscali.nl> <20080216092552.325e5726@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <20080216173315.GU8953@1wt.eu> <20080216094226.1e8eede1@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <20080216175849.GA25636@1wt.eu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Roel Kluin <12o3l@tiscali.nl>, cbe-oss-dev@ozlabs.org, lkml , Arjan van de Ven List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 01:45:23AM -0800, Andrew Pinski wrote: > On Feb 16, 2008 9:58 AM, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > Last but not least, gcc 4 tends to emit stupid checks, to the point that I > > have replaced unlikely(x) with (x) in my code when gcc >= 4 is detected. What > > I observe is that the following code : > > > > if (unlikely(p == NULL)) ... > > > > often gets coded like this : > > > > reg1 = (p == NULL) > > if (reg1 != 0) ... > > > > ... which clobbers reg1 for nothing and performs a double test. > > This really only can happen in GCC 4.0.x and 4.1.x and cannot happen > for 4.2 or 4.3 really because of the way __builtin_expect is handled > for those two. Happy to know that, thanks for the info Andrew! Willy