On Fri, 26 Jul 2002, David Mosberger wrote:
> Davide> i posted a 95% matching patch about one year ago but it fell
> Davide> inside the Alan drop basket :-) basically
>
> Yes, there is nothing deep in the patch. If it wasn't for
> register-starved architectures such as x86, it would be the obviously
> correct thing to do. Actually, it's a lot easier to convert register
> accesses into memory accesses than vice versa, so in principle, the
> new loop should do better even on x86 (this reasoning is what triggers
> my interest in how Crusoe fares).
IMHO the patch makes sense, it reduces memory loads and it "helps" the
compiler to correctly allocate registers.
- Davide
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jul 30 2002 - 14:00:25 EST