[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [patches] powerpc 8xx dcbz problem



Steven Munroe wrote:

I am trying to explain the larger context. That inserting dynamic test
alter over the place is in general a bad idea.

We are not adding dynamic checks 'all over the place'. We're adding an additional check in the startup code where __cache_line_size is being set.

So yes the one time check in libc-start.c does not hurt your situation.
The dynamic __cache_line_size hurts my situation by its very existience.

I don't see how the problem that __cache_line_size causes a noticeable degradation memset itself is relevant to the merits of this patch. That's a preexisting issue.

So please don't assume that you can add dynamic tuning anywhere you want
or anytime you want. Becuase while you may solve your problem you will
invariable harm someone elses situation.

I still don't understand what is being harmed by this patch.

nathan

--
Nathan Sidwell    ::   http://www.codesourcery.com   ::         CodeSourcery
nathan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    ::     http://www.planetfall.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk