From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MsfGX-0003p1-6s for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 12:09:25 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MsfGS-0003iv-NQ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 12:09:24 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=35850 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MsfGS-0003iA-FP for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 12:09:20 -0400 Received: from mx20.gnu.org ([199.232.41.8]:35286) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MsfF0-0007ar-Kp for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 12:07:51 -0400 Received: from mail-ew0-f221.google.com ([209.85.219.221]) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Msf57-0006al-7c for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 11:57:37 -0400 Received: by ewy21 with SMTP id 21so5351187ewy.8 for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 08:55:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <761ea48b0909290853j17dd666bjf177a6165b89a8b9@mail.gmail.com> References: <200909271613.n8RGDCLo020606@d01av04.pok.ibm.com> <4AC06AF0.7010300@redhat.com> <761ea48b0909280121r13c14861y4a0a2683ffb79d2b@mail.gmail.com> <5b31733c0909290851h30e05edauf5c31a3d18fbfbf9@mail.gmail.com> <761ea48b0909290853j17dd666bjf177a6165b89a8b9@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 17:55:36 +0200 Message-ID: <5b31733c0909290855j4da3753je357a5d9ce01efdf@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [Qemu-commits] [COMMIT a4b18c6] tcg/x86_64: generated dec/inc instead of sub/addwhen possible From: Filip Navara Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Laurent Desnogues Cc: Avi Kivity , Aurelien Jarno , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Laurent Desnogues wrote: > On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 5:51 PM, Filip Navara wr= ote: >> >> I vaguely remember measuring it and the results were different on >> Pentium IV-based and Pentium M-based processors. On one of them >> inc/dec was faster, while on the other it was add/sub. I can't >> remember which one had which results though. > > Do you mean in a QEMU context or something else? =A0If that > was with QEMU, was the program significantly large? In QEMU/TCG context. It was some synthetic benchmark, most probably Dhrysto= ne. Best regards, Filip Navara