mirror of
https://github.com/edk2-porting/linux-next.git
synced 2024-12-23 04:34:11 +08:00
800eb01484
Intended to be able to support the current selection of the preferred memcpy() implementation, this patch adds the ability to also measure the two alternative implementations, again by way of using some pre-processsor replacement. While on my Westmere system this proves that the movsb based variant is worse than the movsq based one (since the ERMS feature isn't there), it also shows that here for the default as well as small sizes the unrolled variant outperforms the movsq one. Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/4F16D728020000780006D732@nat28.tlf.novell.com Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> Signed-off-by: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
13 lines
275 B
C
13 lines
275 B
C
|
|
MEMCPY_FN(__memcpy,
|
|
"x86-64-unrolled",
|
|
"unrolled memcpy() in arch/x86/lib/memcpy_64.S")
|
|
|
|
MEMCPY_FN(memcpy_c,
|
|
"x86-64-movsq",
|
|
"movsq-based memcpy() in arch/x86/lib/memcpy_64.S")
|
|
|
|
MEMCPY_FN(memcpy_c_e,
|
|
"x86-64-movsb",
|
|
"movsb-based memcpy() in arch/x86/lib/memcpy_64.S")
|