[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190723072043.GU3402@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 09:20:43 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de, hpa@...or.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com,
michal.lkml@...kovi.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] x86_64, -march=native: POPCNT support
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 12:15:39AM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 11:12:10PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 11:27:20PM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> > > Detect POPCNT instruction support and inline hweigth*() functions
> > > if it is supported by CPU.
> > >
> > > Detect POPCNT at boot time and conditionally refuse to boot.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
> > > ---
> > > arch/x86/include/asm/arch_hweight.h | 24 +++++++++++++++++++
> > > arch/x86/include/asm/segment.h | 1 +
> > > arch/x86/kernel/verify_cpu.S | 8 +++++++
> > > arch/x86/lib/Makefile | 5 +++-
> > > .../drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.c | 2 +-
> > > drivers/misc/sgi-gru/grumain.c | 2 +-
> > > fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c | 4 ++--
> > > include/linux/bitops.h | 2 ++
> > > lib/Makefile | 2 ++
> > > scripts/kconfig/cpuid.c | 7 ++++++
> > > scripts/march-native.sh | 2 ++
> > > 11 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > *WHY* ?
> >
> > AFAICT this just adds lines and complexity and wins aboslutely nothing.
>
> If CPU is know to have POPCNT, it doesn't make sense to go through RDI.
> Additionally some CPUs (still?) have fake dependency on the destination,
> so "popcnt rax, rdi" is suboptimal.
You completely forgot to mention any of that in your Changelog, also I
doubt you can find code where this makes a measurable difference. IOW, I
still doubt it makes any kind of sense.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists