Subject: Re: Performance of various memcpy()'s
To: Bang Jun-Young <junyoung@mogua.com>
From: David Laight <david@l8s.co.uk>
List: tech-userlevel
Date: 10/28/2002 09:01:11
Given the significant performance improvent, I'd go for:
> +ENTRY(memcpy)
> + pushl %esi
> + pushl %edi
> +
> + movl 12(%esp),%edi
> + movl 16(%esp),%esi
> + movl 20(%esp),%ecx
> + movl %edi,%eax /* return value */
> +
> + movl %ecx,%edx
> + cld /* nope, copy forwards. */
> + shrl $2,%ecx /* copy by words */
> + rep
> + movsl
andl $3,%edx
jne 1f
popl %edi
popl %esi
ret
1:
> + movl %edx,%ecx
> + rep
> + movsb
> + popl %edi
> + popl %esi
> + ret
Or even finish off with:
movb (%esi),%cl
decl %edx
movb %cl,(%di)
jne 1b
popl %edi
popl %esi
ret
David
--
David Laight: david@l8s.co.uk