[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080306220610.GB31833@one.firstfloor.org>
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 23:06:10 +0100
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@...il.com>,
Joe Buck <Joe.Buck@...opsys.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Andrew Haley <aph@...hat.com>,
Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@...el32.net>,
Michael Matz <matz@...e.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
gcc@....gnu.org
Subject: Re: Linux doesn't follow x86/x86-64 ABI wrt direction flag
On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 12:56:16PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Richard Guenther wrote:
> >
> >A patched GCC IMHO makes only sense if it is always-on, yet another option
> >won't help in corner cases. And corner cases is exactly what people seem
> >to care about. For this reason that we have this single release, 4.3.0,
> >that
> >behaves "bad" is already a problem.
> >
>
> The option will help embedded vendors who can guarantee that it's not a
> problem.
For very very low values of "help".
To be realistic it is very unlikely anybody will measure a difference
from a few more or a few less clds in a program. It's not that they're
expensive instructions and they normally don't happen in inner loops either.
"If you enable this option you will get an optimization that you cannot
measure" @)
-Andi
--
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