Re: [PATCH 3/6] C-language equivalents of include/asm-*/bitops.h

[Ian Molton]

Russell King wrote:

> This code generates more expensive shifts than our (ARMs) existing C
> version.  This is a backward step.
>
> Basically, shifts which depend on a variable are more expensive than
> constant-based shifts.

arm26 will have the same problem here.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/