From owner-cvs-all Sun Jun 24 0:43:19 2001 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from silby.com (cb34181-a.mdsn1.wi.home.com [24.14.173.39]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 721CC37B401 for ; Sun, 24 Jun 2001 00:43:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from silby@silby.com) Received: (qmail 96549 invoked by uid 1000); 24 Jun 2001 07:43:14 -0000 Received: from localhost (sendmail-bs@127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 24 Jun 2001 07:43:14 -0000 Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2001 02:43:14 -0500 (CDT) From: Mike Silbersack To: Matt Dillon Cc: Bruce Evans , Mikhail Teterin , , , Subject: Re: Inline optimized bzero (was Re: cvs commit: src/sys/netinet tcp_subr.c) In-Reply-To: <200106240513.f5O5DIH75729@earth.backplane.com> Message-ID: <20010624023937.T96538-100000@achilles.silby.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sat, 23 Jun 2001, Matt Dillon wrote: > As a separate issue, I am starting to get real worried about the FP > optimization in bzero() interfering with -current... I'm thinking that > we should rip it out. > > -Matt The FP optimization only affects p5s anyway, right? By the time 5.0 comes out, 1Ghz boxes will be bottom of the line, so it seems like there's little reason to keep the optimization around anyway. I know linux now has various mmx / 3dnow bcopies and bzeros, but from the reports on their mailing lists, it sounds like they cause more problems than they're worth. Mike "Silby" Silbersack To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message