[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110330160756.GL17523@htj.dyndns.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 18:07:56 +0200
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, x86@...nel.org,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip:x86/mm 1/3] x86: A fast way to check capabilities
of the current cpu
Hello,
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 08:58:23AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> >> Add this_cpu_has() which determines if the current cpu has a certain
> >> ability using a segment prefix and a bit test operation.
> >
> >
> > Hmm: if the CPU capability is really tested in a performance critical
> > path, wouldn't it even be better to just use static_branch() now?
> >
>
> We have static_cpu_has() for this specific purpose (it actually predates
> static_branch()).
These patches have performance benefits but I don't think it would be
noticeable. I think it's more of code cleanup.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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