x86: Add optimized popcnt variants
in [Kernel]
|
From: H. Peter Anvin on 26 Feb 2010 13:00 On 02/25/2010 11:47 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa(a)zytor.com> > Date: Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 09:27:25PM -0800 > >> OK, this patch looks pretty good now, but I'm completely lost as to >> what the baseline of this patch is supposed to be. > > Yeah, this is based on PeterZ's http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/2/4/119 > > But I'm not sure which tree has it... > Looks like -mm, which really means that either Andrew has to take your patch, too, or we have to wait until that is upstream until we can merge your patch. I'm a little nervous about just acking the patch and telling Andrew to test it, because I don't know what the fallout would look like. I'm particularly concerned about gcc version dependencies. I guess, on the other hand, if it ends up not getting merged until .35 it's not a huge deal either. -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Borislav Petkov on 27 Feb 2010 03:30 From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa(a)zytor.com> Date: Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 09:48:46AM -0800 > Looks like -mm, which really means that either Andrew has to take your > patch, too, or we have to wait until that is upstream until we can merge > your patch. > > I'm a little nervous about just acking the patch and telling Andrew to > test it, because I don't know what the fallout would look like. I'm > particularly concerned about gcc version dependencies. I have the same concern. Actually, I'll be much more at ease if it saw a bit of wider testing without hitting mainline just yet. I'll try to give it some more testing with the machines and toolchains I can get my hands on next week. > I guess, on the other hand, if it ends up not getting merged until .35 > it's not a huge deal either. Yeah, let's give it another round of testing and queue it for .35 - AFAIR Ingo runs also a wide testing effort so it spending another cycle in -tip and being hammered on by us could give us a bit more certainty. Thanks. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. - Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Operating Systems Research Center -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: H. Peter Anvin on 27 Feb 2010 15:10 On 02/27/2010 12:28 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > >> I guess, on the other hand, if it ends up not getting merged until .35 >> it's not a huge deal either. > > Yeah, let's give it another round of testing and queue it for .35 - > AFAIR Ingo runs also a wide testing effort so it spending another cycle > in -tip and being hammered on by us could give us a bit more certainty. > Yes, if we can get into -tip then we'll get more test coverage, so I'll queue it up for .35 as soon as the merge window closes. Please remind me if I forget. -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Borislav Petkov on 9 Mar 2010 10:40 > On 02/27/2010 12:28 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > Yeah, let's give it another round of testing and queue it for .35 - > > AFAIR Ingo runs also a wide testing effort so it spending another cycle > > in -tip and being hammered on by us could give us a bit more certainty. > > > > Yes, if we can get into -tip then we'll get more test coverage, so I'll > queue it up for .35 as soon as the merge window closes. Please remind > me if I forget. Hi Peter, I see that you've added the HWEIGHT-capitalized interfaces for compile-time constants with fce877e3. Which means, the bits in <include/asm-generic/bitops/const_hweight.h> from your original patch at http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/2/4/119 need changing (or have changed already but I've missed them). IOW, where can I get the current version of that last patch so that I can base my __arch_hweightXX stuff ontop of it for testing? Thanks. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. - Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Operating Systems Research Center -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Peter Zijlstra on 9 Mar 2010 11:00
On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 16:36 +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > On 02/27/2010 12:28 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > > Yeah, let's give it another round of testing and queue it for .35 - > > > AFAIR Ingo runs also a wide testing effort so it spending another cycle > > > in -tip and being hammered on by us could give us a bit more certainty. > > > > > > > Yes, if we can get into -tip then we'll get more test coverage, so I'll > > queue it up for .35 as soon as the merge window closes. Please remind > > me if I forget. > > Hi Peter, > > I see that you've added the HWEIGHT-capitalized interfaces for > compile-time constants with fce877e3. Which means, the bits in > <include/asm-generic/bitops/const_hweight.h> from your original patch at > http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/2/4/119 need changing (or have changed already > but I've missed them). > > IOW, where can I get the current version of that last patch so that I can > base my __arch_hweightXX stuff ontop of it for testing? Should all be fine as it is, that patch ( http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/2/4/119 ) is against a kernel with fce877e3 in, I've just checked and it still applies to tip/master as of this writing (although it grew a single 2 line offset for 1 hunk). -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ |