| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 20:31:39 -0700 From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org> To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org> Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] i386: optimize memset of 6 and 8 bytes On Fri, 17 Aug 2007 18:57:00 -0700 Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org> wrote: > > On Fri, 2007-08-17 at 18:54 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > On Fri, 17 Aug 2007 18:49:34 -0700 > > Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, 2007-08-17 at 16:50 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > > > Tne network code does memset for 6 and 8 byte values, that can easily > > > > be optimized into simple assignments without string instructions. > > > > > > > > > so... question. > > > Why are we doing this by hand? Wouldn't gcc just generate this code in > > > the first place (when using __builtin_memset)? I very much suspect it > > > would (and if some version doesn't.... we really ought to get that > > > fixed) > > > > i386 and x86_64 are not using __builtin_memset, as least from the > > code that I see generated. > > .. maybe we should just fix it that way then? > There probably is history behind the decision, like gcc problems on some old compiler version. -- Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org> - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists