public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [BK+PATCH] remove __constant_memcpy
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 10:32:02 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030417143202.GA18749@gtf.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1050585430.31390.32.camel@dhcp22.swansea.linux.org.uk>

On Thu, Apr 17, 2003 at 02:17:16PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Iau, 2003-04-17 at 01:57, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > The patch below is the conservative, obvious patch.  It only kicks in 
> > when __builtin_constant_p() is true, and it only applies to the i386 
> > arch.  
> 
> You are assuming the compiler is smart about stuff - it doesnt know
> SSE/MMX for page copies etc. For small copies it should alays win, but

Prior to my patch, __constant_memcpy was -already- only used for small,
constant-size copies.

Therefore, my patch applied __builtin_memcpy only to small,
constant-size copies.  The existing kernel custom-memcpy code continued
to perform as expected.

You and Linus both seem to think MMX/SSE/SSE2 is somehow in the
equation, but I do not see that at all.  I left those paths alone.
Clarification/LART requested...


> isn't it best if so to use __builtin_memcpy without our existing
> macros not just trust the compiler ?

hum, I didn't parse this at all:
Use of __builtin_memcpy implies trusting the compiler :)

Maybe you meant s/without/with/ ?

	Jeff




  reply	other threads:[~2003-04-17 14:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-04-17  0:57 [BK+PATCH] remove __constant_memcpy Jeff Garzik
2003-04-17  1:04 ` Jeff Garzik
2003-04-17  2:06 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-04-17  8:46   ` Arjan van de Ven
2003-04-17  9:02     ` Roman Zippel
2003-04-17  9:04       ` Arjan van de Ven
2003-04-17  9:11         ` Jakub Jelinek
2003-04-17 16:07     ` Linus Torvalds
2003-04-17 19:07       ` Jeff Garzik
2003-04-17 19:19       ` Jeff Garzik
2003-04-17 19:54         ` Linus Torvalds
2003-04-17 23:49           ` Jeff Garzik
2003-04-17 23:52             ` Jeff Garzik
2003-04-17 23:59             ` Linus Torvalds
2003-04-18  0:29               ` H. Peter Anvin
2003-04-18  9:06             ` Arjan van de Ven
2003-04-18 14:31             ` Timothy Miller
2003-04-18 15:07               ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-04-17 22:58         ` J.A. Magallon
2003-04-17 23:10           ` Jeff Garzik
2003-04-17 13:17 ` Alan Cox
2003-04-17 13:17 ` Alan Cox
2003-04-17 14:32   ` Jeff Garzik [this message]
2003-04-17 14:40     ` Jeff Garzik
2003-04-17 20:01   ` H. Peter Anvin
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-04-17  2:22 Nakajima, Jun
2003-04-17 23:50 Chuck Ebbert

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=20030417143202.GA18749@gtf.org \
    --to=jgarzik@pobox.com \
    --cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
    /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