From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (ffbox0-bg.ffmpeg.org [79.124.17.100]) by master.gitmailbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31231470F7 for ; Thu, 27 Jul 2023 13:55:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.1.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAD1E68C9F6; Thu, 27 Jul 2023 16:55:10 +0300 (EEST) Received: from 1.mo550.mail-out.ovh.net (1.mo550.mail-out.ovh.net [178.32.127.22]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 089A268C944 for ; Thu, 27 Jul 2023 16:55:04 +0300 (EEST) Received: from director3.ghost.mail-out.ovh.net (unknown [10.109.138.52]) by mo550.mail-out.ovh.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B23927D07 for ; Thu, 27 Jul 2023 13:55:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ghost-submission-6684bf9d7b-bmpm5 (unknown [10.111.208.1]) by director3.ghost.mail-out.ovh.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D8DF01FEAD for ; Thu, 27 Jul 2023 13:55:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from courmont.net ([37.59.142.95]) by ghost-submission-6684bf9d7b-bmpm5 with ESMTPSA id qVhbLTZ3wmS1NgAAz5VpRQ (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 27 Jul 2023 13:55:02 +0000 Authentication-Results: garm.ovh; auth=pass (GARM-95G001e9df5f87-626f-4a66-af4a-b7fb7a3a9f43, 6708BE1CF9E86FD1D34669AFAFD2C4EBFD739E2B) smtp.auth=postmaster@courmont.net X-OVh-ClientIp: 95.214.66.65 Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2023 16:55:00 +0300 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=E9mi_Denis-Courmont?= To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android In-Reply-To: <667c0538-92d0-84d6-7459-ccb4194f2ea7@arm.com> References: <667c0538-92d0-84d6-7459-ccb4194f2ea7@arm.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Ovh-Tracer-Id: 8590334817236425209 X-VR-SPAMSTATE: OK X-VR-SPAMSCORE: -100 X-VR-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedviedrieeggdeggecutefuodetggdotefrodftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfqggfjpdevjffgvefmvefgnecuuegrihhlohhuthemucehtddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjughrpeffhffvufgfjghfkfggtgfgsehtqhhmtddtreejnecuhfhrohhmpeftrohmihcuffgvnhhishdqvehouhhrmhhonhhtuceorhgvmhhisehrvghmlhgrsgdrnhgvtheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepgfeulefhfeffgeevgeetgeeuheeguddvffeltdejgeetuddvtdejhffhgeetvdejnecukfhppeduvdejrddtrddtrddupdelhedrvddugedrieeirdeihedpfeejrdehledrudegvddrleehnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehinhgvthepuddvjedrtddrtddruddpmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpeeorhgvmhhisehrvghmlhgrsgdrnhgvtheqpdhnsggprhgtphhtthhopedupdhrtghpthhtohepfhhfmhhpvghgqdguvghvvghlsehffhhmphgvghdrohhrghdpoffvtefjohhsthepmhhoheehtddpmhhouggvpehsmhhtphhouhht Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Replace br return with ret X-BeenThere: ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: FFmpeg development discussions and patches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org Sender: "ffmpeg-devel" Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Post: Hi, The use of RET vs BR also has microarchitectural side effects. AFAIU, RET should always be paired with an earlier BL/BLR to avoid interfering with branch prediction. So depending on the circumstances, either one of these should be addressed: * Clarify that this is actually a function return , and RET should be used anyway, regardless of BTI. * Keep BR and add BTI J landing pads where appropriate, if this wasn't really a function return. Br, _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".