From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760214AbYDSW3W (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Apr 2008 18:29:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751984AbYDSW3Q (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Apr 2008 18:29:16 -0400 Received: from z2.cat.iki.fi ([212.16.98.133]:58626 "EHLO z2.cat.iki.fi" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751449AbYDSW3P (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Apr 2008 18:29:15 -0400 Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 01:29:11 +0300 From: Matti Aarnio To: Joe Perches Cc: Harvey Harrison , Alexander van Heukelum , Alexander van Heukelum , LKML Subject: Re: Alternative implementation of the generic __ffs Message-ID: <20080419222911.GJ3700@mea-ext.zmailer.org> References: <1207563950.7880.1246457209@webmail.messagingengine.com> <20080418201809.GA5036@mailshack.com> <1208563762.10414.19.camel@brick> <1208566724.4891.25.camel@localhost> <1208567093.10414.20.camel@brick> <1208573728.11990.14.camel@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1208573728.11990.14.camel@localhost> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 07:55:28PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 18:11 -0700, dean gaudet wrote: > > have you benchmarked it? > > I modified Alexander's benchmark: > http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/4/18/267 > to include 32 and 64 bit variants called smallest. > > On an old ARM: ... I am curious, why not take the code already in glibc ffs() for ARM ? That is, if the ffs() is all that important detail in kernel ? /Matti Aarnio