This is the mail archive of the
libc-ports@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the libc-ports project.
Re: [patch, mips] Improved memset for MIPS
- From: "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos at redhat dot com>
- To: Steve Ellcey <sellcey at mips dot com>
- Cc: libc-ports at sourceware dot org
- Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 18:35:01 -0400
- Subject: Re: [patch, mips] Improved memset for MIPS
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <93a232b5-9d0b-4a27-bbb5-16e3ae7c4b89 at BAMAIL02 dot ba dot imgtec dot org> <522957A4 dot 2030400 at redhat dot com> <1378483403 dot 5770 dot 307 dot camel at ubuntu-sellcey> <522A0CF8 dot 8040008 at redhat dot com> <1378510388 dot 5770 dot 346 dot camel at ubuntu-sellcey> <522A9197 dot 9000601 at redhat dot com> <1378844980 dot 5770 dot 378 dot camel at ubuntu-sellcey> <522F88A6 dot 1000904 at redhat dot com> <1378847551 dot 5770 dot 384 dot camel at ubuntu-sellcey>
On 09/10/2013 05:12 PM, Steve Ellcey wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-09-10 at 17:01 -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>
>>> Now that I can see the results of 'make bench' I do have a question,
>>> what is the difference between the results in bench-memset.out and
>>> bench-memset-ifunc.out? MIPS doesn't yet support IFUNC. It looks like
>>> the results in the two files are pretty close, so maybe they are
>>> identical runs on machines with no IFUNC?
>>
>> You get the default implementation of __libc_ifunc_impl_list (the function
>> used by the testing infrastructure to iterate the functions implemented
>> as ifuncs) which adds no additional functions to the test list. You still
>> test the usual defaults e.g. simple, builtin, and original function entry.
>> Therefore it's the same as the non-IFUNC version with the results being
>> the same modulo testing variance.
>>
>> Does that answer your question?
>
> I think so, but just to be clear: If I did have IFUNC and 4 different
> implementations of memset (for example), would the testing
> infrastructure run and benchmark all 4 versions of memset?
Yes.
Cheers,
Carlos.