Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 01:43:50 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <20080819.014350.79505195.davem@davemloft.net>
To: harvey.harrison@gmail.com
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/23] sparc: use the new byteorder headers
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
In-Reply-To: <1219106897.17033.71.camel@brick>
References: <1219106897.17033.71.camel@brick>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1072
Lines: 32

From: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:48:17 -0700

> Signed-off-by: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@gmail.com>

I'm not so sure about this.

If I understand the ___swab*() inlines in linux/swab.h,
it has the following priority of swapping methods:

1) If arch defines __arch_swab*(), this is used.

2) If arch defines __arch_swab*p(), variable is popped onto
   the stack and we do the pointer based operation.

3) Else normal C version is used.

Case #2 is totally disagree with.

Especially for small swaps such as 16-bit the inline expansion
of the portable C code is going to be much better than popping
the variable onto and then back off the stack.

Sparc 64-bit only provides the __arch_swab*p() routines so
#2 is what will in fact be used here.

So NACK based upon that analysis.
--
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/