[openib-general] Re: [PATCH 7 of 20] ipath - misc driver support	code
    Bryan O'Sullivan 
    bos at pathscale.com
       
    Thu Mar  9 15:29:02 PST 2006
    
    
  
On Thu, 2006-03-09 at 15:13 -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
> This is kind of theoritical, but it seems to me that it would be safer
> to write this as
> 
> 	int ipath_unordered_wc(void)
> 	{
> 		return boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor != X86_VENDOR_AMD;
> 	}
> 
> after all, Via is probably going to have an x86-64 CPU one of these
> days, and I doubt you've checked that their WC flush is ordered.
It's purely a performance optimisation.  Since we tune very closely to
each CPU, there's no point right now in sort-of-tuning for a CPU that
doesn't yet exist :-)
	<b
    
    
More information about the general
mailing list