Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752915Ab1DRUBr (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Apr 2011 16:01:47 -0400 Received: from mga03.intel.com ([143.182.124.21]:47907 "EHLO mga03.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752313Ab1DRUBa (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Apr 2011 16:01:30 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.64,234,1301900400"; d="scan'208";a="421437703" From: Andi Kleen To: Robert Richter Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Stephane Eranian , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] perf, x86: Use ALTERNATIVE() to check for X86_FEATURE_PERFCTR_CORE References: <1302913676-14352-1-git-send-email-robert.richter@amd.com> <1302913676-14352-4-git-send-email-robert.richter@amd.com> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 13:00:57 -0700 In-Reply-To: <1302913676-14352-4-git-send-email-robert.richter@amd.com> (Robert Richter's message of "Sat, 16 Apr 2011 02:27:55 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 564 Lines: 19 Robert Richter writes: > Using ALTERNATIVE() when checking for X86_FEATURE_PERFCTR_CORE avoids > an extra pointer chase and data cache hit. Is that really a performance critical path? Seems more like unnecessary obfuscation to me. -Andi -- ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only -- 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/