On 2017-11-14 15:16:34 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Oh, well. I am not sure what went wrong. But I can see the difference
> now, which is what you have:
> @@ -2652,7 +2652,7 @@ numericvar_to_int128:
> pxor %xmm0, %xmm0
> movl $1, %ebx
> testq %rdi, %rdi
> - movups %xmm0, (%r14)
> + movaps %xmm0, (%r14)
> je .L452
> call pfree@PLT
> .L452:
> @@ -13856,10 +13856,10 @@ numeric_poly_combine:
> movq 8(%rbp), %rdx
> movq %r12, CurrentMemoryContext(%rip)
> movq %rdx, 8(%rax)
> - movdqu 16(%rbp), %xmm0
> - movups %xmm0, 16(%rax)
> - movdqu 32(%rbp), %xmm0
> - movups %xmm0, 32(%rax)
> + movdqa 16(%rbp), %xmm0
> + movaps %xmm0, 16(%rax)
> + movdqa 32(%rbp), %xmm0
> + movaps %xmm0, 32(%rax)
> jmp .L2110
> .L2124:
> leaq .LC0(%rip), %rdi
> @@ -14338,8 +14338,8 @@ int8_avg_combine:
> movq 8(%rbp), %rdx
> movq %r12, CurrentMemoryContext(%rip)
> movq %rdx, 8(%rax)
> - movdqu 16(%rbp), %xmm0
> - movups %xmm0, 16(%rax)
> + movdqa 16(%rbp), %xmm0
> + movaps %xmm0, 16(%rax)
Just to be sure: This is the diff you're getting when you *back out* the
fix, right? Because movdqa etc are the alignment requiring instructions,
whereas movdqu is unaligned...
Greetings,
Andres Freund
