Re: Pentium __delay weirdness... the final results (longish)

Martin Mares (mj@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz)
Mon, 15 Sep 1997 21:14:01 +0200


Hi,

> > Here's the final summary all numbers are in cycles as reported by rdtsc.
> > This is using a set of assembly that executes the entire timing loop twice,
> > in an effort to get the caching right.
>
> for my Intel PODP83 things are different (worse) which is why I started
> this whole thread...

Can anyone tell me why do we inline the udelay code? Making it a separate
function IMHO won't cause any harm and all alignment problems would be gone.

Have a nice fortnight

-- 
Martin `MJ' Mares   <mj@gts.cz>   http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~mj/
Faculty of Math and Physics, Charles University, Prague, Czech Rep., Earth
"What's the difference between '486 and Pentium? About 2.10^-4"