From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 97A3E3858D3C for ; Mon, 25 Mar 2024 15:15:59 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 97A3E3858D3C Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 97A3E3858D3C Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=170.10.133.124 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1711379761; cv=none; b=knKLP2arwupsF8TovvhEYrrEtJGuWagr0g3Stx9DWQRLsqwTygEV6I7mNRSv5imSB5UduA7A/h31u5IqlsWqZhdXeoFJHIL3udeG6ZDmHG1FnAm+XonTqAoRnC0JH8t9gNTptk6+yfzXHUClymmckWAZl7wSLdc+OE5pcJ9sJ6Y= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1711379761; c=relaxed/simple; bh=dyNmwULeCTZGO2IZr8J9AsoFwjwQUrLjSvcjGxIJRP4=; h=DKIM-Signature:From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=IgPmrJfQdd6EHN3iAfg4hENEWsu01AobNIcJZdMTH4iHpsRPskntj3bKnmuRLjZPoU4aIogC7kSo5STumMr2bD7n73m6lodijp9MMoXz5bL/Jl8wVWP6WpH838qf5iI5CwkbOQ3/fLKCljyWkV3Ff1u7vZXMoKnhpyJEOcd+00w= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1711379759; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=9ojKOfHPgvv/g+Ohptnw1H00KvCqMEfRd+cgpCKRlbA=; b=GoUeORFNX2lBAsSoWwafUOzsgysPqGvyhW01Rlr63SyhuLoFRq+ghkHdEtl6hlq2Ywcx4g xXz/RSABBzHzLy70R7GEM4x0NfxaerpqHN8fxo7F0A/WZVQPA+tJ5x44Dx65+GI8dIbJvK gB/OpWsBCpk2tD5vS1zpfiZ9CFlSBJM= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-132-8RyNayUTM4OzmVi6FKS3_w-1; Mon, 25 Mar 2024 11:15:55 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 8RyNayUTM4OzmVi6FKS3_w-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.8]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 16B30186E1C3; Mon, 25 Mar 2024 15:15:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from oldenburg.str.redhat.com (unknown [10.39.192.146]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B7841C54182; Mon, 25 Mar 2024 15:15:52 +0000 (UTC) From: Florian Weimer To: Adhemerval Zanella Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org, "H . J . Lu" , Noah Goldstein , Sajan Karumanchi , bmerry@sarao.ac.za, pmallapp@amd.com, Michael Hudson-Doyle , Simon Chopin Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] x86: Improve ERMS usage on Zen3+ In-Reply-To: <20240208130840.533348-1-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> (Adhemerval Zanella's message of "Thu, 8 Feb 2024 10:08:37 -0300") References: <20240208130840.533348-1-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2024 16:15:47 +0100 Message-ID: <87il1a8hr0.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.11.54.8 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: * Adhemerval Zanella: > Adhemerval Zanella (3): > x86: Fix Zen3/Zen4 ERMS selection (BZ 30994) > x86: Do not prefer ERMS for memset on Zen3+ > x86: Expand the comment on when REP STOSB is used on memset > > sysdeps/x86/dl-cacheinfo.h | 43 ++++++++++--------- > .../multiarch/memset-vec-unaligned-erms.S | 4 +- > 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) Should we backport this into release branches? This issue was first raised as an Ubuntu downstream bug, so maybe they'd appreciate a backport for this? We want this backport in Fedora, so it would help us, too. Thanks, Florian