From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261218AbTIKLHK (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Sep 2003 07:07:10 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261220AbTIKLHK (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Sep 2003 07:07:10 -0400 Received: from [217.129.131.20] ([217.129.131.20]:260 "HELO kore.nara.homeip.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S261218AbTIKLHF (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Sep 2003 07:07:05 -0400 From: Ricardo Bugalho Subject: Re: nasm over gas? Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 12:07:01 +0100 User-Agent: Pan/0.14.0 (I'm Being Nibbled to Death by Cats!) Message-Id: References: <20030904104245.GA1823@leto2.endorphin.org> <200309052028.37367.insecure@mail.od.ua> <200309100034.58742.insecure@mail.od.ua> To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, insecure@mail.od.ua MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 10 Sep 2003 00:34:57 +0300, insecure wrote: > That instruction is in main() initialization sequence. I.e. it is > executed once per program invocation. Summary: we lost 8 bytes for no > gain. There's not even a speed gain - we lost 8 bytes of _icache_, that > will bite us somewhere else. You're quite right, but the I-Cache is a non issue: this code will be evicted when there is need to put something else. And because its only run once at the beginning of the program, it won't cause anything important to be evicted. You can complain about the time it gets to fetch the code from RAM though. Quoting another post from you: "I do _not_ advocate using asm anywhere except speed critical code." This code is obviously not critical. So, it makes a bad choice for discussion. -- Ricardo