On Fri, Nov 01, 2024 at 06:33:51AM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote: > We could try to write a more elaborate version of pg_memory_is_all_zeros(), > but > as it looks like there is only one use case, then it's probably better to not > implement (revert) this change here and "just" add a comment as to why > pg_memory_is_all_zeros() > should not be used here, thoughts? > > [0]: https://godbolt.org/z/xqnW4MPY5
Note that the two printf() calls make the code less optimized. Anyway, I see the following from bufpage.s for these lines under -O2: 1) On HEAD at 07e9e28b56db: .LVL306: .loc 3 201 23 is_stmt 1 discriminator 1 view .LVU547 cmpq $1024, %rbx <- Yep, that's wrong. jne .L417 2) On HEAD at 49d6c7d8daba: .LVL299: .loc 1 131 16 is_stmt 0 discriminator 1 view .LVU524 cmpq $8192, %rbx je .L419 3) With the patch sent at [1]: .LVL306: .loc 3 201 23 is_stmt 1 discriminator 1 view .LVU545 cmpq $8192, %rbx jne .L417 So it does not matter one way or another for 2) or 3), does it? [1]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/zyr02ofhiwg1h...@paquier.xyz -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
