>Is the goal to make these identical? If so, it should be easy to do, >but I was not aware that was the intent. Identical is only required if it can be proved that the orginal was perfectly optimised to a unique peak point :-) My post was just requesting David, Ken (and anyone else who can schedule ia64 instructions in their head) to take a look to make sure this isn't stalling someplace. If the new code runs just as fast as the old, the only possible remaining sticking point would be maintainability of the code ... assembly code does not lend itself well to the games we play in C code to keep the #ifdefs under control. You've added six new #ifdefs to the fifteen already in ivt.S ... it was already hard to read (which is why I resorted to compiling and diffing the dissassembly to see what really changed). -Tony - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.htmlReceived on Fri Nov 11 10:03:56 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-11-11 10:04:03 EST