On 17.02.2010, at 10:47, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 02/17/2010 11:42 AM, OHMURA Kei wrote: >>>>> "We think"? I mean - yes, I think so too. But have you actually measured >>>>> it? >>>>> How much improvement are we talking here? >>>>> Is it still faster when a bswap is involved? >>>> Thanks for pointing out. >>>> I will post the data for x86 later. >>>> However, I don't have a test environment to check the impact of bswap. >>>> Would you please measure the run time between the following section if >>>> possible? >>> >>> It'd make more sense to have a real stand alone test program, no? >>> I can try to write one today, but I have some really nasty important bugs >>> to fix first. >> >> >> OK. I will prepare a test code with sample data. Since I found a ppc >> machine around, I will run the code and post the results of >> x86 and ppc. >> > > I've applied the patch - I think the x86 results justify it, and I'll be very > surprised if ppc doesn't show a similar gain. Skipping 7 memory accesses and > 7 tests must be a win.
Sounds good to me. I don't assume bswap to be horribly slow either. Just want to be sure. Alex
