> > These ended up getting rejected by Linus, so I'm going to hold off on > > this for now. If they're really out of lib/ then I'll take the C > > routines in arch/riscv, but either way it's an issue for the next > > release. > Agree, we should take the C routine in arch/riscv for common > implementation. If any vendor what custom implementation they could > use the alternative framework in errata for string operations. I though the asm ones were significantly faster because they were less affected by read latency. (But they were horribly broken for misaligned transfers.) David - Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
