annita.zhang added a comment. > > >>> Third, I have not see a justification for why complexity for instruction >>> prefix padding is necessary. All the effected CPUs support multi-byte >>> nops, so we're talking about a *single micro op* difference between the nop >>> form and prefix form. Can anyone point to a performance delta due to this? >>> If not, I'd suggest we should start with the nop form, and then build the >>> prefix form in a generic manner for all alignment varieties. >> >> +1. > > +1. Starting from just NOP padding sounds a simple and good first step. We > can explore segment override prefixes in the future.
I think it's a good suggestion to start with NOP padding as the first step. In our previous experiment, we saw that the prefix padding was slight better than NOP padding, but not much. We will retest the NOP padding and go back to you. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D70157/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D70157 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
