[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-arm] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7] Improve buffer_is_zero
From: |
Peter Maydell |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-arm] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7] Improve buffer_is_zero |
Date: |
Wed, 24 Aug 2016 11:52:25 +0100 |
On 24 August 2016 at 11:26, Adam Richter <address@hidden> wrote:
> I hope that that consideration, combined with the micro-costs to
> readability and portability of using and ELF specific and perhaps
> currently GCC specific feature might tip the balance against the
> savings of a level of function call indirection that I assume the use
> of ifunc was intended to provide.
It doesn't actually save a level of indirection -- if you single step
through an ifunc call it goes via some ELF section. The thing it
does save is that you don't pay the cost of figuring out the right
ifunc to use on this system at startup, but only when the ifunc call
path is first used. That's useful for a big thing like glibc which
might have lots of ifuncs and not want to pay a big startup cost,
but for QEMU there's really no need given we only have one...
thanks
-- PMM
- [Qemu-arm] [PATCH 3/7] cutils: Rearrange buffer_is_zero acceleration, (continued)
- [Qemu-arm] [PATCH 3/7] cutils: Rearrange buffer_is_zero acceleration, Richard Henderson, 2016/08/24
- [Qemu-arm] [PATCH 5/7] cutils: Rewrite x86 buffer zero checking, Richard Henderson, 2016/08/24
- [Qemu-arm] [PATCH 6/7] cutils: Rewrite aarch64 buffer zero checking, Richard Henderson, 2016/08/24
- [Qemu-arm] [PATCH 7/7] cutils: Rewrite ppc buffer zero checking, Richard Henderson, 2016/08/24
- Re: [Qemu-arm] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7] Improve buffer_is_zero, no-reply, 2016/08/24
- Re: [Qemu-arm] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7] Improve buffer_is_zero, Dr. David Alan Gilbert, 2016/08/24
Re: [Qemu-arm] [PATCH 0/7] Improve buffer_is_zero, Vijay Kilari, 2016/08/25