From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 16 12:20:07 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6CB616A4CE for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 12:20:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.des.no (flood.des.no [217.116.83.31]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 761FB43D3F for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 12:20:07 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: by smtp.des.no (Pony Express, from userid 666) id EB9035309; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 21:20:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from dwp.des.no (des.no [80.203.228.37]) by smtp.des.no (Pony Express) with ESMTP id 1C6ED5308; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 21:19:58 +0100 (CET) Received: by dwp.des.no (Postfix, from userid 2602) id B4C7033C6F; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 21:19:57 +0100 (CET) To: Kris Kennaway References: <20040214082420.GB77411@nevermind.kiev.ua> <200402160352.16477.wes@softweyr.com> <20040216035412.GA70593@xor.obsecurity.org> <20040216201658.GE3791@saboteur.dek.spc.org> From: des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?q?Sm=F8rgrav?=) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 21:19:57 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20040216201658.GE3791@saboteur.dek.spc.org> (Bruce M. Simpson's message of "Mon, 16 Feb 2004 20:16:58 +0000") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.090024 (Oort Gnus v0.24) Emacs/21.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on flood.des.no X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.63 cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org cc: Juan Tumani Subject: Re: FreeBSD 5.2 v/s FreeBSD 4.9 MFLOPS performance (gcc3.3.3 v/s gcc2.9.5) X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 20:20:07 -0000 Bruce M Simpson writes: > I'm not happy with the patch as-is and would be happier if a cleaner > MI-way of expressing this were found. What exactly is wrong with the patch? (except for the fact that empirical tests show it should align on a 64-byte boundary) DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - des@des.no