[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <B403FEFA-78F7-4D8F-A46C-E5174527D79E@zytor.com>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2016 21:54:50 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>
CC: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>, x86-ml <x86@...nel.org>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, zengzhaoxiu@....com,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Zhaoxiu Zeng <zhaoxiu.zeng@...il.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2] x86/hweight: Get rid of the special calling convention
On May 11, 2016 4:24:09 AM PDT, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 07:15:19AM -0400, Brian Gerst wrote:
>
>> I think he meant the out of line version would be asm, so you could
>> control what registers were clobbered.
>
>Yeah, it might save a few cycles on the call, but given that most
>machines should have popcnt these days is it worth the hassle/cost of
>duplicating the lib/hweight.c magic in asm (and remember, twice, once
>for 32bit and once for 64bit) ?
I was thinking it isn't really very complex code even in assembly as it is super-regular; you can even crib the gcc-generated code if you wish.
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse brevity and formatting.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists