Bruce Evans wrote: > On Wed, 5 Mar 2008, Colin Percival wrote: >> Bruce Evans wrote: >>> Change float_t and double_t to long double on i386. >> >> Doesn't this have a rather severe performance impact on any code which >> uses double_t? > > No. As mentioned in the commit message, this has no performance effect > except in cases where it avoids compiler bugs. [...] if you use long double > for memory variables then you get a severe performance impact and some > space loss for the load instruction, since loading long doubles is > much slower than loading doubles (about 4 times slower on Athlons).
Either I'm misunderstanding something, or you seem to be disagreeing with yourself here... if I have the following code double_t foo, bar, foobar; foobar = foo + bar; then prior to this change the processor loads and stores doubles, while after this change the processor loads and stores long doubles, with the associated performance penalty. Colin Percival _______________________________________________ cvs-all@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
