Re: [PATCH, resend] x86-64: improve insn scheduling inSAVE_ARGS_IRQ

[Jan Beulich]

>>> On 24.02.12 at 21:21, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 02/24/2012 03:55 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>  	leaq -RBP(%rsp),%rdi	/* arg1 for handler */
>> -	testl $3, CS(%rdi)
>> +	testl $3, CS-RBP(%rsi)
>>  	je 1f
> 
> IIRC there is no imm8 version of testl; could this be a testb instead or
> is that going to cause stalls on some platforms you think?

As far as I'm aware, memory operations don't suffer "partial register
stalls" or alike, so yes, using a testb here ought to be appropriate.

Jan

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/