search for: cmovnz

Displaying 2 results from an estimated 2 matches for "cmovnz".

Did you mean: cmovne
2015 Jan 22
2
[LLVMdev] X86TargetLowering::LowerToBT
That’s not how partial-flags update stalls work. There is no independent tracking of individual bits in EFLAGS. This means that BT + CMOVNZ has a false dependency on whatever instruction wrote to EFLAGS before BT and requires an extra µop vis-a-vis TEST + CMOVNZ or SHR + AND. Please do not use BT. It is a performance hazard. If you don’t believe me for some reason, here’s the relevant quote from Agner: "BT, BTC, BTR, and BTS c...
2015 Jan 22
2
[LLVMdev] X86TargetLowering::LowerToBT
> On Jan 22, 2015, at 1:22 PM, Fiona Glaser <fglaser at apple.com> wrote: > > According to Agner’s docs, many CPUs have slower BT than TEST; Haswell has only 0.5 inverse throughput as opposed to 0.25, Atom has 1 instead of 0.5, and Silvermont can’t even dual-issue BT (it locks both ALUs). So while BT does seem have a shorter instruction encoding than TEST for TEST reg, imm32 where