Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
quoted text
> On Mon, 19 Mar 2007, Shawn O. Pearce wrote:
> >
> > DrNick suggested on #git to try flipping the isspace test around.
> > This is a smaller change and generated the same ~3.60 seconds run
> > as Dscho's patch.  I like DrNick's version better.  ;-)
> 
> For me, the result seems to be in the noise.
> 
> It may be due to running on Core 2. It's not very sensitive to 
> micro-optimizations like this. It definitely makes sense to test the 
> *stable* test first, since that will help branch prediction (the 
> "isspace()" test is *not* very predictable), so I don't disagree with the 
> patch, but I suspect it depends a lot on the microarchitecture just how 
> much it matters.
> 
> Do you perhaps have a P4? It has a very bad branch mispredict penalty, so 
> putting the predictable branch first could explain the big difference you 
> see..

I tested both patches on a PowerPC G4.  (Apple PowerBook, 1.5 GHz)
Running on Mac OS X 10.4.8.

Might be more of a Linux<->Darwin thing; perhaps my isspace is
significantly slower than yours is...  after all my mmap runs
like a PC from the 1980s...  ;-)

-- 
Shawn.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html