Re: [CFT] faster athlon/duron memory copy implementation

From: Måns Rullgård (mru@users.sourceforge.net)
Date: Fri Oct 25 2002 - 04:19:16 EST

Next message: Petr Vandrovec: "Re: 2.5.44: Strange oopses triggered by pipe_write?"
Previous message: Denis Vlasenko: "Re: Csum and csum copyroutines benchmark"
Next in thread: Jorge Bernal \: "Re: [CFT] faster athlon/duron memory copy implementation"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Dave Jones <davej@codemonkey.org.uk> writes:

> The functions being benchmarked are written in assembly.
> gcc will not change these in any way, making compiler flags
> or revision irrelevant.

Doesn't gcc schedule inline assembly instructions?

-- 
Måns Rullgård
mru@users.sf.net
-
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/

Next message: Petr Vandrovec: "Re: 2.5.44: Strange oopses triggered by pipe_write?"
Previous message: Denis Vlasenko: "Re: Csum and csum copyroutines benchmark"
Next in thread: Jorge Bernal \: "Re: [CFT] faster athlon/duron memory copy implementation"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 31 2002 - 22:00:27 EST