From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MsfqV-0000rI-C1 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 12:46:35 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MsfqT-0000qE-Rd for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 12:46:34 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=41740 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MsfqT-0000q7-JL for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 12:46:33 -0400 Received: from mx20.gnu.org ([199.232.41.8]:35428) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MsfFA-00085E-S4 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 12:08:02 -0400 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.155]) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Msf3X-0006SQ-PQ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 11:55:59 -0400 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id e21so1058046fga.10 for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 08:53:57 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5b31733c0909290851h30e05edauf5c31a3d18fbfbf9@mail.gmail.com> References: <200909271613.n8RGDCLo020606@d01av04.pok.ibm.com> <4AC06AF0.7010300@redhat.com> <761ea48b0909280121r13c14861y4a0a2683ffb79d2b@mail.gmail.com> <5b31733c0909290851h30e05edauf5c31a3d18fbfbf9@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 17:53:57 +0200 Message-ID: <761ea48b0909290853j17dd666bjf177a6165b89a8b9@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [Qemu-commits] [COMMIT a4b18c6] tcg/x86_64: generated dec/inc instead of sub/addwhen possible From: Laurent Desnogues Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Filip Navara Cc: Avi Kivity , Aurelien Jarno , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 5:51 PM, Filip Navara wrote: > > 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? If that was with QEMU, was the program significantly large? Laurent