Code optimization <LEA Instruction>

[Michael Loftis]

I'd like to look at this 'test.'

I've proven many times that documentation != implementation.  I mean no 
disrespect for Mr. Cox, but often times what my code does and what my 
documentation explains don't exactly line up, and this is true of many 
programmers and chip engineers.

IAE  I have *not* been following this thread and apologise if my comment 
is out in left field.

:pulls on his asbestos undies just in case...:


--
Michael Loftis
ICQ: 15648280  AIM: DyJailBait
Funny quip of the moment just happens to be....
Linux is like a tent:
no gates, no windows, and an Apache inside!


-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Cox <alan en lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date:   Fri, 28 Jan 2000 00:17:39 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Re: Code optimization <LEA Instruction>

> > > > be used to change the value of an index register faster than
> > > > using the ADD instruction (Page G-10, Intel '486 Rag).
> > > 
> > > It is
> > 
> > It is not. Never was and can't possibly be. Further, tests show
> > as expected, that address generation takes more time than register
> > addition.
> 
> > > Your test is wrong. See the notes on address generation stalls
> > 
> > Yea. Sure.
> 
> Read the intel book then come back and apologise
> 
> next..
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
> linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo en vger.rutgers.edu
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



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