On Sun, 5 Nov 2006, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> This means we should definitely change restore_flags() to only STI,
> never popf
Whaa? That would be wrong. We don't always sti, quite often the flags were
disabled anyway.
And changing restore-flags to a "conditional branch around sti" is likely
not much better - mispredicted branches on a P4 are potentially worse than
the popf cost.
Side note: for the netburst microarchitecture - aka P4 - in general,
something like 48 cycles is a _good_ thing. I measured a internal
micro-fault for marking a page table entry dirty at over 1500 cycles!
There's a reason Intel dropped Netburst in favour of Core 2 - which is
largely just an improved Pentium Pro uarch. Admittedly, the "just" is a
bit unfair, because there's a _lot_ of improvement, but still..
So you should never actually make any real code design decisions based on
a P4 result. The P4 is goign away, and it was odd.
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
