On Tuesday 20 November 2007 03:19, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> David Miller wrote:
> >> There was, at some point, discussion about using the gcc TLS mechanism,
> >> which should permit even better code to be generated. Unfortunately, it
> >> would require gcc to be able to reference %gs instead of
H. Peter Anvin writes:
> There was, at some point, discussion about using the gcc TLS mechanism,
> which should permit even better code to be generated. Unfortunately, it
> would require gcc to be able to reference %gs instead of %fs (and vice
> versa for i386), which I don't think is
David Miller wrote:
There was, at some point, discussion about using the gcc TLS mechanism,
which should permit even better code to be generated. Unfortunately, it
would require gcc to be able to reference %gs instead of %fs (and vice
versa for i386), which I don't think is available in
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 18:00:23 -0800
> Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > Support fast cpu ops in x86_64 by providing a series of functions that
> > generate the proper instructions. Define CONFIG_FAST_CPU_OPS so that core
> > code
> > can exploit the
Christoph Lameter wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
There was, at some point, discussion about using the gcc TLS mechanism, which
should permit even better code to be generated. Unfortunately, it would
How would that be possible? Oh. You mean the discussion where I mentioned
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> There was, at some point, discussion about using the gcc TLS mechanism, which
> should permit even better code to be generated. Unfortunately, it would
How would that be possible? Oh. You mean the discussion where I mentioned
using the thread
Christoph Lameter wrote:
Support fast cpu ops in x86_64 by providing a series of functions that
generate the proper instructions. Define CONFIG_FAST_CPU_OPS so that core code
can exploit the availability of fast per cpu operations.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
There
Christoph Lameter wrote:
Support fast cpu ops in x86_64 by providing a series of functions that
generate the proper instructions. Define CONFIG_FAST_CPU_OPS so that core code
can exploit the availability of fast per cpu operations.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
There was,
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
There was, at some point, discussion about using the gcc TLS mechanism, which
should permit even better code to be generated. Unfortunately, it would
How would that be possible? Oh. You mean the discussion where I mentioned
using the thread
Christoph Lameter wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
There was, at some point, discussion about using the gcc TLS mechanism, which
should permit even better code to be generated. Unfortunately, it would
How would that be possible? Oh. You mean the discussion where I mentioned
From: H. Peter Anvin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 18:00:23 -0800
Christoph Lameter wrote:
Support fast cpu ops in x86_64 by providing a series of functions that
generate the proper instructions. Define CONFIG_FAST_CPU_OPS so that core
code
can exploit the availability of
David Miller wrote:
There was, at some point, discussion about using the gcc TLS mechanism,
which should permit even better code to be generated. Unfortunately, it
would require gcc to be able to reference %gs instead of %fs (and vice
versa for i386), which I don't think is available in
H. Peter Anvin writes:
There was, at some point, discussion about using the gcc TLS mechanism,
which should permit even better code to be generated. Unfortunately, it
would require gcc to be able to reference %gs instead of %fs (and vice
versa for i386), which I don't think is available
On Tuesday 20 November 2007 03:19, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
David Miller wrote:
There was, at some point, discussion about using the gcc TLS mechanism,
which should permit even better code to be generated. Unfortunately, it
would require gcc to be able to reference %gs instead of %fs (and
14 matches
Mail list logo
