Re: [PATCH 1/3] ArmPkg/CompilerIntrinsicsLib: replace memcpy and memset with C code

[Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>]

On 11 August 2016 at 23:50, Cohen, Eugene <eugene@hp.com> wrote:
>> > Why does memcpy performance matter?  In addition to the overall
>> memcpy stuff scattered around C code we have an instance that is
>> particularly sensitive to memcpy performance.  For DMA operations
>> when invoking double-buffering or access to portions of a buffer that
>> is common mapped (i.e. uncached on non-coherent DMA systems) the
>> impact of a non-optimized memcpy is enormous compared to the
>> optimized ones because the penalty is amplified by orders of
>> magnitude due to uncached memory access latency.
>> >
>>
>> That code would be using CopyMem(), no? This only serves the
>> compiler
>> generated calls, which are few since Tianocore does not allow
>> initialized locals.
>
> I see and agree that should minimize the impact.   I guess I'll ask the naive question.  Could the BaseMemoryLib and CompilerIntrinsicsLib share the same stuff?
>

Let me look into that