Re: Specific support for Intel Atom architecture

[Ulrich Drepper]

On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 8:04 AM, Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The problem is that you can't express the situations where
> movbe is better than bswap (you need both and the old and the new
> value) in inline assembler in a way that gcc decides automatically.

True.  But I was mostly thinking about loads from memory.  A quick
search for ntoh*/hton* shows code like

        u_int16_t queue_num = ntohs(nfmsg->res_id);

If there would be a ntohs_load() macro movbe could be used.
--
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/