Hi Janne,
I thought I already approved this a few weeks ago
sorry, I totally missed that. Comes from having a computer
crash on you...
Thanks for the review!
Thomas
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 10:51, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>> this patch uses division by known sizes (which can usually be replaced
>> by a simple shift because intrinsics have sizes of power of two) instead
>> of division by the size extracted from the array descriptor itself.
>>
>> This shou
Hi,
this patch uses division by known sizes (which can usually be replaced
by a simple shift because intrinsics have sizes of power of two) instead
of division by the size extracted from the array descriptor itself.
This should save about 20 cycles for a single calculation.
I'll go through the
On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 16:13, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> Hello world,
>
> this patch uses division by known sizes (which can usually be replaced
> by a simple shift because intrinsics have sizes of power of two) instead
> of division by the size extracted from the array descriptor itself.
>
> This sh
Hello world,
this patch uses division by known sizes (which can usually be replaced
by a simple shift because intrinsics have sizes of power of two) instead
of division by the size extracted from the array descriptor itself.
This should save about 20 cycles for a single calculation.
I'll go thr
