x86: Prefer TZCNT over BFS

Browse source

Following a relatively recent compiler change, make use of the
fact that for non-zero input BSF and TZCNT produce the same
result, and that CPUs not knowing of TZCNT will treat the
instruction as BSF (i.e. ignore what looks like a REP prefix to
them). The assumption here is that TZCNT would never have worse
performance than BSF.

For the moment, only do this when the respective generic-CPU
option is selected (as there are no specific-CPU options
covering the CPUs supporting TZCNT), and don't do that when size
optimization was requested.

Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/504DEA1B020000780009A277@nat28.tlf.novell.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>

...

This commit is contained in:

Jan Beulich 2012-09-10 12:24:43 +01:00 • committed by Ingo Molnar

parent 1edfbb4153

commit 5870661c09

1 changed files with 17 additions and 2 deletions

Show all changes Ignore whitespace when comparing lines Ignore changes in amount of whitespace Ignore changes in whitespace at EOL

Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

19

arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h

View file