From: David Howells Subject: Re: memfill Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2017 09:40:04 +0000 Message-ID: <27995.1486460404@warthog.procyon.org.uk> References: <20170206144902.GH2267@bombadil.infradead.org> <1486307804-27903-1-git-send-email-minchan@kernel.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20170206144902.GH2267@bombadil.infradead.org> Content-ID: <27994.1486460404.1@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, Minchan Kim , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, ngupta@vflare.org, zhouxianrong@huawei.com, zhouxiyu@huawei.com, weidu.du@huawei.com, zhangshiming5@huawei.com, Mi.Sophia.Wang@huawei.com, won.ho.park@huawei.com List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org Matthew Wilcox wrote: > [adding linux-arch to see if anyone there wants to do an optimised > version of memfill for their CPU] For mn10300, this is superfluous since the memset() implementation will do optimised filling of up to 8 x 4 bytes per loop if the alignments suit. This is also superfluous for frv as that will do up to 8 x 8 bytes per loop. So on both those arches, memfill() should probably just wrap memset(). David