Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751431AbXB0BVS (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Feb 2007 20:21:18 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751421AbXB0BVS (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Feb 2007 20:21:18 -0500 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([192.83.249.54]:39698 "EHLO terminus.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751395AbXB0BVQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Feb 2007 20:21:16 -0500 Message-ID: <45E38762.5040407@zytor.com> Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 17:20:34 -0800 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20061219) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stephen Hemminger CC: Jan Engelhardt , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] div64_64 support References: <20070223170527.4ca695b2@freekitty> <20070226132834.70514f19@freekitty> In-Reply-To: <20070226132834.70514f19@freekitty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 862 Lines: 22 Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > Hmm. Those are the GCC internal versions, that are picked up but > doing divide in place. Do we want to allow general 64 bit in kernel to > be easily used? It could cause sloppy slow code, but it would look > cleaner. > ... and it would handle datatypes which may be architecture-dependent a lot cleaner. I thought the motivation for div64() was that a 64:32->32 divide could be done a lot faster on a number of platforms (including the important x86) than a generic 64:64->64 divide, but gcc doesn't handle the devolution automatically -- there is no such libgcc function. -hpa - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/