On 05/01/2018 11:28, Paul Turner wrote: > > The "pause; jmp" sequence proved minutely faster than "lfence;jmp" which is > why > it was chosen. > > "pause; jmp" 33.231 cycles/call 9.517 ns/call > "lfence; jmp" 33.354 cycles/call 9.552 ns/call
Do you have timings for a non-retpolined indirect branch with the predictor suppressed via IBRS=1? So at least we can compute the break even point. Paolo
