[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5601DB07.3000205@c-s.fr>
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 00:49:43 +0200
From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>
To: Scott Wood <scottwood@...escale.com>
Cc: Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@...nsmode.se>,
"paulus@...ba.org" <paulus@...ba.org>,
"mpe@...erman.id.au" <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
"benh@...nel.crashing.org" <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 22/25] powerpc32: move xxxxx_dcache_range() functions
inline
Le 23/09/2015 00:34, Scott Wood a écrit :
> On Tue, 2015-09-22 at 22:57 +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>> >Here is what I get in asm. First one is with "if (i) mb();". We see gcc
>> >puts a beqlr. This is the form that is closest to what we had in the
>> >former misc_32.S
>> >Second one if with "mb()". Here we get a branch to sync for a useless sync
> I was more concerned with keeping the code simple than the asm output.
>
Right, but is that so complicated to say: if we did nothing in the loop,
no need to sync ?
Christophe
--
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