On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 05:04:19PM -0300, Glauber Costa wrote:
> There is no reason why should i386 and x86_64 code for rdtsc be different.
> Unify them.
This makes the generated i386 assembly code far more complex (21
instructions instead of 5).
> ---
> cpu-all.h | 11 +----------
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/cpu-all.h b/cpu-all.h
> index 2a2b197..1c9e2a3 100644
> --- a/cpu-all.h
> +++ b/cpu-all.h
> @@ -930,16 +930,7 @@ static inline int64_t cpu_get_real_ticks(void)
> return ((int64_t)h << 32) | l;
> }
>
> -#elif defined(__i386__)
> -
> -static inline int64_t cpu_get_real_ticks(void)
> -{
> - int64_t val;
> - asm volatile ("rdtsc" : "=A" (val));
> - return val;
> -}
> -
> -#elif defined(__x86_64__)
> +#elif defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__)
>
> static inline int64_t cpu_get_real_ticks(void)
> {
> --
> 1.5.0.6
>
>
>
>
--
.''`. Aurelien Jarno | GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73
: :' : Debian developer | Electrical Engineer
`. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
`- people.debian.org/~aurel32 | www.aurel32.net
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100.
Use priority code J8TL2D2.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
_______________________________________________
kvm-devel mailing list
kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
