[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Fwd: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] SVM support]
From: |
Paul Brook |
Subject: |
Re: [Fwd: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] SVM support] |
Date: |
Wed, 19 Sep 2007 16:35:49 +0100 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.9.7 |
> > >> OK, great. Having 64 bits may also help for additional (ie future...)
> > >> features in PowerPC 64 emulation.
> > >
> > > Maybe worth letting the target say whether it needs 32 or 64-bit
> > > flags.
> > > The flag lookup is likely to be on a hot path.
> > >
>
> I may be wrong, but it seems to me that TB flags are only used to be
> compared in tb_find_fast and tb_find_slow, which are not a very fast
> path (we come here when we cannot jump directly to the next tb and are
> not in the most time critical code) then we can afford adding a few asm
> instructions (I would say max 2 ?) to replace a 32 bits comparison with
> a 64 bits one. My feeling is that the performance loss here won't be
> sensible, but that may need to be proved.
For some reason I thought the flags were also used in the hash lookup. This is
not the case, so I withdraw my objection.
Paul
- [Fwd: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] SVM support], J. Mayer, 2007/09/18
- Re: [Fwd: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] SVM support], J. Mayer, 2007/09/18
- Re: [Fwd: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] SVM support], Paul Brook, 2007/09/18
- Re: [Fwd: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] SVM support], Alexander Graf, 2007/09/19
- Re: [Fwd: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] SVM support], Alexander Graf, 2007/09/19
- Re: [Fwd: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] SVM support], Jocelyn Mayer, 2007/09/19
- Re: [Fwd: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] SVM support], Alexander Graf, 2007/09/19
- Re: [Fwd: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] SVM support],
Paul Brook <=
- Re: [Fwd: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] SVM support], J. Mayer, 2007/09/19
Re: [Fwd: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] SVM support], Alexander Graf, 2007/09/19