From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alessandro Rubini Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 21:17:34 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 1/3] memcpy: copy one word at a time if possible In-Reply-To: <1255028988.9100.1163.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1255028988.9100.1163.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1255019456.9100.1140.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1255014766.9100.1099.camel@localhost.localdomain> <45d5e3a574bf4844f46f50b2c88054a5b28f973b.1255000877.git.rubini@ unipv.it> <20091008160026.GA9077@mail.gnudd.com> <20091008182337.GA11975@mail.gnudd.com> Message-ID: <20091008191734.GA13161@mail.gnudd.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de > The statistics are going to be very different for different scenarios. Yes, I know. > For example, network operations seem to be the majority of your large > memcpys, this isn't the case for everyone. True. I noticed it after sending -- although I expected it. > In any case, my only suggestion would be that if we're improving > memcpy()/memset(), do the extra 10% of effort required to make them a > little better. That 10% of effort will improve 15.2% of all memcpy() > calls for the foreseeable future:) It mainly depends on Wolfgang but, hey, it's not 10% of effort. > I promise I won't comment on future patches:) No problem at all. And I apologize if my tone looked rude, it wasn't meant to. Thank you for your comments. /alessandro, who didn't notice ppc has an asm implementation of its own