On 10/10/2013 11:38 PM, Richard Yao wrote:
> On 10/10/2013 11:29 PM, Xin Li wrote:
>> On 10/10/13 20:18, Richard Yao wrote:
>>> Thanks for letting us know about this. I have a few comments:
>>
>>> 1. We could eliminate a branch entirely by doing this:
>>
>>> mlen = MIN(d_end - dst, mlen); while (--mlen >= 0) *dst++ = *cpy++
>>
>> I don't think this eliminates the branching as MIN is usually a macro
>> that expands to a > b ? b : a.
> 
> My mistake. I was thinking of generic swap routines. I do think that
> using the MIN() macro is more readable though.

On second thought, I was right the first time. It is possible to do this
without branching:

#define MIN(x, y) ((y) ^ (((x) ^ (y)) & -((x) < (y))))
#define MIN(x, y) ((x) ^ (((x) ^ (y)) & -((x) < (y))))

http://graphics.stanford.edu/~seander/bithacks.html#IntegerMinOrMax

This makes MIN(d_end - dst, mlen) look inefficient, but a proper
optimizing compiler should store the result of d_end - dst in a register
to avoid doing the subtraction 3 times.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
developer mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.open-zfs.org/mailman/listinfo/developer

Reply via email to