RE: [PATCH RFC] [X86] performance improvement for memcpy_64.S byfast string.

[Ma, Ling]

Hi H. Peter Anvin
>What it sounds to me is that for Nehalem, we want to use memcpy_c for >=
>1024 bytes and the old code for < 1024 bytes;

Yes, so we modify memcpy_c as memcpy_new for Nehalem, and keep old
code for Core2 is acceptable?

Thanks
Ling

--
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/