From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/2864 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andre Renaud Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: ARM optimisations Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 12:15:21 +1300 Message-ID: Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1362093332 13645 80.91.229.3 (28 Feb 2013 23:15:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 23:15:32 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-2865-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Fri Mar 01 00:15:56 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UBChf-0000wu-5z for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 01 Mar 2013 00:15:55 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 29868 invoked by uid 550); 28 Feb 2013 23:15:33 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 29860 invoked from network); 28 Feb 2013 23:15:33 -0000 X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=RRL09u24TFPA/0Aq32v1nRfEuPn03WQmrkRJrnZOXAQ=; b=W7F6+xxYpBPwHi4DMi9/VuvuOzc6XPtREN5UzlLY5ltG8Z9FCmwYbLQlvWA5g3zU4s cAgCPWqxdGryQkJbxwXX1hiIgg+v/lX/3et4zFfTfCd196l+01/38xFJv1Tv3EMmu0YP 2qnzp1YESq/HKpDI+HbQbREe1Oo8K9EB1ktzfhfdBfebH9p+88POc5klpnAjVGsVHH0J qydH4148FcxOXHAl+udII8gAeQOlEaE25qEUh/EChgpLEgQaxmV2t0OaXk80TI2CzLHY NlKafma+oVJ8hNB94AN2zT0IMksSppWbGEk0gL8Nuda01N4/EObtJ89aJb92yHfPatZ8 WXlQ== X-Received: by 10.182.36.5 with SMTP id m5mr7098809obj.57.1362093321184; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 15:15:21 -0800 (PST) X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlcKoRwngD0mRs1MAvtwH4fo0V/dI6P70im4hAD1ONi6H8fBEiGlUj3lTRKBr5+yE1EviQi Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:2864 Archived-At: Hi, Can anyone tell me what the policy for musl is regarding ARM optimised assembly implementations of functions such as memcpy/memmove? I notice that there are i386/x86_64 versions for some of these. Doing some simple testing on an ARM platform I found that an ARM asm implementation of memcpy is ~80% faster than the C one currently in MUSL (this is on an ARMv5, so no NEON instructions or similar). I don't think I'm capable of writing the optimised version entirely myself, however there are various implementations floating around in libraries such as bionic etc... Is it possible to have BSD licensed code brought in to musl (which is MIT licensed)? Regards, Andre