From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zhuyan34@huawei.com>
Received: from huawei.com (szxga01-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.187])
 by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 91CA6383F85E
 for <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>; Wed,  6 May 2020 12:41:15 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 91CA6383F85E
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org;
 dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=huawei.com
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org;
 spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=zhuyan34@huawei.com
Received: from DGGEMM403-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.54])
 by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 70D9E52F6F5B08B22401
 for <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>; Wed,  6 May 2020 20:41:12 +0800 (CST)
Received: from dggeme711-chm.china.huawei.com (10.1.199.107) by
 DGGEMM403-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.20.211) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS)
 id 14.3.487.0; Wed, 6 May 2020 20:40:34 +0800
Received: from dggeme762-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.108) by
 dggeme711-chm.china.huawei.com (10.1.199.107) with Microsoft SMTP Server
 (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id
 15.1.1913.5; Wed, 6 May 2020 20:40:33 +0800
Received: from dggeme762-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.8.68.53]) by
 dggeme762-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.8.68.53]) with mapi id 15.01.1913.007;
 Wed, 6 May 2020 20:40:34 +0800
From: "zhuyan (M)" <zhuyan34@huawei.com>
To: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
CC: "libc-alpha@sourceware.org" <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] memcpy: use bhs/bls instead of bge/blt [BZ #25620]
Thread-Topic: [PATCH v2] memcpy: use bhs/bls instead of bge/blt [BZ #25620]
Thread-Index: AdYjo3FNUAy+TrmnS7W99icvlQUahg==
Date: Wed, 6 May 2020 12:40:34 +0000
Message-ID: <e0feb6e03f9641f585d38b288c643b49@huawei.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
x-originating-ip: [10.67.102.217]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS,
 SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on
 server2.sourceware.org
X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list <libc-alpha.sourceware.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://sourceware.org/mailman/options/libc-alpha>,
 <mailto:libc-alpha-request@sourceware.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/>
List-Post: <mailto:libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:libc-alpha-request@sourceware.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://sourceware.org/mailman/listinfo/libc-alpha>,
 <mailto:libc-alpha-request@sourceware.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 May 2020 12:41:17 -0000

* Florian Weimer:

> > -	blt	.Ltail63aligned
> > +	bls	.Ltail63aligned
>=20
> Is bls really the unsigned variant of blt?  Why not blo?

Yes, it is more appropriate to use blo instead of blt.