Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 14 Aug 2018 08:38:49 -0700
From:      Ravi Pokala <rpokala@freebsd.org>
To:        Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org>, Mark Johnston <markj@freebsd.org>, <src-committers@freebsd.org>, <svn-src-all@freebsd.org>, <svn-src-head@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r337754 - head/sys/x86/x86
Message-ID:  <4C558668-E3D9-4EEF-BE93-7D2147E7B17E@panasas.com>
In-Reply-To: <afb7b9a8-19d8-e763-e3ed-c12e2f7094d6@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <201808141402.w7EE2seW007725@repo.freebsd.org> <afb7b9a8-19d8-e763-e3ed-c12e2f7094d6@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----Original Message-----
From: <owner-src-committers@freebsd.org> on behalf of Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org>
Date: 2018-08-14, Tuesday at 08:34
To: Mark Johnston <markj@freebsd.org>, <src-committers@freebsd.org>, <svn-src-all@freebsd.org>, <svn-src-head@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: svn commit: r337754 - head/sys/x86/x86

> On 14/08/2018 17:02, Mark Johnston wrote:
>>   At some point memcpy() may be an ifunc, ifunc resolution cannot be done
>>   until CPU identification has been performed, and CPU identification must
>>   be done after loading any microcode updates.
> 
> Wouldn't it be cool if before an ifunc is resolved (to a proper
> optimized version) it pointed to a default implementation that is
> sufficiently naive and robust that it can work on all CPUs?
> But I don't know much about ifunc implementation, so no idea if it can
> work like that.

Or, if that can't be done, have a pre_ifunc_memcpy() with the default implementation, which is explicitly for use before ifuncs are set up.

-Ravi

> -- 
> Andriy Gapon





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4C558668-E3D9-4EEF-BE93-7D2147E7B17E>