mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: dborkman@redhat.com, ffusco@redhat.com, tgraf@suug.ch,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, matthew@wil.cx, wli@holomorphy.com,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, nyc@holomorphy.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] hash: Let gcc decide how to multiply
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 10:17:57 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87sikjhdfu.fsf@rasmusvillemoes.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140825.114754.1052522152538122040.davem@davemloft.net> (David Miller's message of "Mon, 25 Aug 2014 11:47:54 -0700 (PDT)")

David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> writes:

> From: Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com>
> Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 14:58:37 +0200
>
>> On 08/25/2014 02:13 PM, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
>>> A 9+ years old comment in hash_64 says that gcc can't optimize
>>> multiplication by GOLDEN_RATIO_PRIME_64. Well, compilers get smarter
>>> and CPUs get faster all the time, so it is perhaps about time to
>>> revisit that assumption.
>> 
>> Seems fine by me, but Cc'ing a couple of others (as those you have
>> Cc'ed haven't written that code :)). You might want to let your
>> changes go via Andrew's tree, too, perhaps ...
>
> You need to test the code generation for a cpu where the multiply
> instruction is more expensive than the shifts and adds.

Yes, I should, but I'm afraid I can't. I only have x86 hardware, and
even if I managed to set up some cross-compiler toolchain, I wouldn't
know what CPUs to target. So I was hoping someone else could test this
on appropriate platforms.

Thanks,
Rasmus

      reply	other threads:[~2014-08-26  8:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-08-25 12:13 Rasmus Villemoes
2014-08-25 12:58 ` Daniel Borkmann
2014-08-25 18:47   ` David Miller
2014-08-26  8:17     ` Rasmus Villemoes [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87sikjhdfu.fsf@rasmusvillemoes.dk \
    --to=linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dborkman@redhat.com \
    --cc=ffusco@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=matthew@wil.cx \
    --cc=nyc@holomorphy.com \
    --cc=tgraf@suug.ch \
    --cc=wli@holomorphy.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®