[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4E4964F1.1020900@zytor.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2011 11:26:57 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Andrew Lutomirski <luto@....edu>
CC: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
melwyn lobo <linux.melwyn@...il.com>,
Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@...glemail.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
borislav.petkov@....com
Subject: Re: x86 memcpy performance
On 08/15/2011 09:58 AM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 12:12 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
>> On 08/15/2011 08:36 AM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
>>>
>>> (*) kernel_fpu_begin is a bad name. It's only safe to use integer
>>> instructions inside a kernel_fpu_begin section because MXCSR (and the
>>> 387 equivalent) could contain garbage.
>>>
>>
>> Uh... no, it just means you have to initialize the settings. It's a
>> perfectly good name, it's called kernel_fpu_begin, not kernel_fp_begin.
>
> I prefer get_xstate / put_xstate, but this could rapidly devolve into
> bikeshedding. :)
>
a) Quite.
b) xstate is not architecture-neutral.
-hpa
--
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