Re: Some functions are not inlined by gcc 3.2, resulting code is

[Jussi Laako]

--=-67TaTHsFZ60+ikLrNS58
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, 2002-11-04 at 02:17, Denis Vlasenko wrote:

> Alignment does not eliminate jump. It only moves jump target to 16 byte
> boundary.=20

Exactly. And P4 cache is _very_ bad at anything not 16-byte aligned. The
speed penalty is big. This seems to be problem only with Intel CPU's, no
such large effects on AMD ones.

> This _probably_ makes execution slightly faster but on average
> it costs you 7,5 bytes. This price is too high when you take into account
> L1 instruction cache wastage and current bus/core clock ratios.

7.5 bytes is not much compared to possibility of trashed cache or
pipeline flush.
Do you have execution time numbers of jump to 16-byte aligned address vs
unaligned address?

	- Jussi Laako

--=-67TaTHsFZ60+ikLrNS58
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQA9xZTlS3txJU4L5RQRAvvhAKC2fZBUjHjjt66FBckzET0Gd6DjRACfbkem
uFIfBVhaGXV/hLHgrREcpnc=
=2ZBM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-67TaTHsFZ60+ikLrNS58--