Gentoo Archives: gentoo-amd64

From: Jared Lindsay <cinder.sub@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-amd64@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] x86_64 optimization patches for glibc.
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 07:44:06
Message-Id: e16d914c0507240042780f83e6@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-amd64] x86_64 optimization patches for glibc. by Ian McCulloch
Back on to a different subject...has anyone looked at the libm
section?  I am curious as to how much of a performance increase that
would add if we can get it working.

On 7/23/05, Ian McCulloch <ianmcc@××××××××××××××××××.de> wrote:
> > > On Sat, 23 Jul 2005, Matt Randolph wrote: > > > Sean Johnson wrote: > > > > > LOL! > > > That must be for the folk that don't mind patching glibc, but will get > > > upset if memcpy does strange things. :) > > > > > > > > > > You try to do a good turn and they laugh at you. That'll teach me. > > Heh ;-) I would like to see a version of memcpy.c that DOES do something > malicious, without being completely obvious. This isn't Windows, a > seg-fault isn't going to take down the kernel, or corrupt the filesystem;) > > Cheers > Ian > -- > gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list > >
-- gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-amd64] x86_64 optimization patches for glibc. Simon Strandman <simon.strandman@×××××.com>