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, 1 Nov 2013 16:18:50 -0000 From: "David Laight" <David.Laight@...LAB.COM> To: "Neil Horman" <nhorman@...driver.com>, "Ben Hutchings" <bhutchings@...arflare.com> Cc: "Doug Ledford" <dledford@...hat.com>, "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...nel.org>, "Eric Dumazet" <eric.dumazet@...il.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: RE: [PATCH] x86: Run checksumming in parallel accross multiple alu's > How would you suggest replacing the jumps in this case? I agree it would be > faster here, but I'm not sure how I would implement an increment using a single > conditional move. I think you need 3 instructions, move a 0, conditionally move a 1 then add. I suspect it won't be a win! If you do 'win' it is probably very dependent on how the instructions get scheduled onto the execution units - which will probably make it very cpu type dependant. David -- 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