Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2013 12:55:01 -0600 From: Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: ARM optimisations On 03/02/2013 12:21:02 AM, Rich Felker wrote: > > systems aren't that common. (They existed, the tin can tools nail > > board used one, but the generic C code works for them. Point is I'm > > not sure they're worth _optimizing_ for if it costs the vast > > majority of systems a 25% performance hit and we don't want to > > maintain multiple versions. If you _have_ an armv5 version, the > > armv4 one won't/shouldn't get much testing.) > > Can you explain why you think a version that's v4 compatible will be > that much slower? If so, v5 code can be used as long as it checks > __hwcap and falls back to a simple working version... Alas, I do not have recent benchmarks. The timesys guys benched various stuff in 2006 and that's where I grabbed the 25% figure. I mostly test under qemu, where benchmarks are meaningless for real hardware. If I'm in error, ignore me. Rob
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.