[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m27har9vnq.fsf@firstfloor.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 13:00:57 -0700
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] perf, x86: Use ALTERNATIVE() to check for X86_FEATURE_PERFCTR_CORE
Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com> writes:
> Using ALTERNATIVE() when checking for X86_FEATURE_PERFCTR_CORE avoids
> an extra pointer chase and data cache hit.
Is that really a performance critical path?
Seems more like unnecessary obfuscation to me.
-Andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only
--
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