[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAFUsyfLPLQBs2gQwLDUZHudQrkHSXCcV=Wi0=Znb3gChDZvX2Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2023 14:20:24 -0500
From: Noah Goldstein <goldstein.w.n@...il.com>
To: David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>
Cc: "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"torvalds@...ux-foundation.org" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
"dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: x86/csum: Remove unnecessary odd handling
On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 9:38 AM David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com> wrote:
>
> From: Noah Goldstein
> > Sent: 01 September 2023 23:21
> ...
> > + return add32_with_carry(temp64 >> 32, temp64 & 0xffffffff);
>
> The generic C alternative:
> return (temp64 + ror64(temp64, 32)) >> 32;
> is the same number of instructions but might get
> better scheduling.
>
Sorry, I missed this.
Bright idea :)
Adding in new version + you reviewed by tag. Then hopefully this can
get in...
> The C version of csum_fold() from arc/include/asm/checksum.h
> is also better than the x86 asm version.
> (And also pretty much all the other architecture dependant
> copies.)
>
> David
>
> -
> Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
> Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists