[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <52039A5E.9050503@gentoo.org>
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2013 15:17:18 +0200
From: Luca Barbato <lu_zero@...too.org>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Optimized C memcpy
On 08/08/13 15:03, Andrew Bradford wrote:
> Sorry, I now see why 4 byte blocks won't work due to the misalignment,
> but 8 or 16 seem like they should be possible.
> Is it just the evaluation of the for loop being expensive that's trying
> to be avoided?
Probably 32bytes uses cachelines better on average.
lu
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.
