Re: [PATCH v2] sh: Remove IO memcpy and memset from sh code
Geert Uytterhoeven <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.ports.sh.devel,gmane.linux.kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAMuHMdXfiqM2Weoeq-PRw-p9wqMrBwMBcSWjFF8f_uvmVrRS7A@mail.gmail.com> |
Hi Adrian, On Thu, 30 Jan 2025 at 10:31, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, 2025-01-30 at 10:13 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > On Thu, 30 Jan 2025 at 09:44, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Tue, 2025-01-28 at 11:13 +0100, Julian Vetter wrote: > > > > Remove IO memcpy and memset from sh specific code and fall back to the > > > > new implementations from lib/iomem_copy.c. They use word accesses if the > > > > buffers are aligned and only fall back to byte accesses for potentially > > > > unaligned parts of a buffer. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Julian Vetter <[email protected]> > > > > --- > > > > Changes for V2: > > > > - Removed also SH4 specific memcpy_fromio code > > > > > I'm not sure that I understand the motivation to remove hand-optimized sh4 assembler > > > code for memset and drop it in favor of potentially slower generic C code. What is > > > the reasoning behind this? > > > > See Arnd's feedback on v1 > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected] > > I read Arnd's feedback but I don't really know whether GCC produces better code than > this hand-written assembly. Is there any compelling argument? > > I'm just worried we would slow down something as fundamental as memset(). it's not memset(), but memset_io(), i.e. clearing (slow) mapped I/O memory. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected] In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds