On Sad, 2005-07-23 at 02:30 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Larger does not always mean slower. If it did, nobody would implement a > loop unrolling optimization.
Generally speaking nowdays it does. Almost all loop unrolls are a loss on PIV. > ex. Look at how GCC generates jump tables for switch() when there's about > 10-12 (or more) case's sparsely scattered in the rage from 0 through 255. You are comparing with very expensive jump operations its an unusual case. For the majority of situations the TLB/cache overhead of misses vastly outweighs the odd clock cycle gained by verbose output. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
