From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI,
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Received: (qmail 20716 invoked from network); 7 Jul 2020 15:00:40 -0000
Received: from mother.openwall.net (195.42.179.200)
  by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 7 Jul 2020 15:00:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 9536 invoked by uid 550); 7 Jul 2020 15:00:33 -0000
Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:musl@lists.openwall.com>
List-Help: <mailto:musl-help@lists.openwall.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:musl-unsubscribe@lists.openwall.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:musl-subscribe@lists.openwall.com>
List-ID: <musl.lists.openwall.com>
Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com
Received: (qmail 9515 invoked from network); 7 Jul 2020 15:00:32 -0000
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2020 17:00:20 +0200
From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@port70.net>
To: Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>
Cc: musl@lists.openwall.com
Message-ID: <20200707150020.GJ2048759@port70.net>
Mail-Followup-To: Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>, musl@lists.openwall.com
References: <20200624204243.GL6430@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
 <20200625081504.GE2048759@port70.net>
 <20200625153936.GP6430@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
 <20200625173125.GF2048759@port70.net>
 <20200625205024.GR6430@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
 <20200625211536.GS6430@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
 <20200626012003.GX6430@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
 <20200626084049.GG2048759@port70.net>
 <20200706221242.GM6430@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200706221242.GM6430@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Subject: Re: [musl] Release prep for 1.2.1, and afterwards

* Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org> [2020-07-06 18:12:43 -0400]:
> I think you saw already, but just to make it clear on the list too,
> it's upstream now. I'm open to further improvements like doing
> memmove (either as a separate copy of the full implementation or some
> minimal branch-to-__memcpy_fwd approach) but I think what's already
> there is sufficient to solve the main practical performance issues
> users were hitting that made aarch64 look bad in relation to x86_64.
> 
> I'd still like to revisit the topic of minimizing the per-arch code
> needed for this so that all archs can benefit from the basic logic,
> too.

thanks.

note that the code has some internal .p2align
directives that assume the entry is aligned to
some large alignment (.p2align 6 in orig code)

i think it would be better to keep the entry
aligned (but i don't know if it makes a big
difference on some existing core, it's more
for consistency with upstream).

musl normally does not align function entries
but for a few select functions it is probably
not too much overhead?