News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on AMD ships microcode update to disable some branch prediction. Parent comment

Re:AMD ships microcode update to disable some branch prediction by PopsiclePete on Friday January 05, 2018 @07:05PM (#16082881)
I never liked those "if" statements! "IF"? Why is there an "if"? It implies you're uncertain, or have hesitations, doubts even? That's rookie shit. I never do. Straight and happy path for this cowboy, always.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AMD ships microcode update to disable some branch prediction by tzahola on Friday January 05, 2018 @07:26PM (#16082986)
If you have conditionals in your program, it means that you're trying to do too many things at once. Follow the UNIX philosophy: do one thing, and do it well!
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AMD ships microcode update to disable some branch prediction by fib on Friday January 05, 2018 @10:58PM (#16083765)
And always run every program and always pass every option! Do everything well!
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AMD ships microcode update to disable some branch prediction by earenndil on Saturday January 06, 2018 @04:01AM (#16084487)
No branches if you movfuscate[1] your code! You do end up with that happy path, that straight path, that clean path that's wholly immune to those pesky branching bugs.

1: https://github.com/xoreaxeaxeax/movfuscator

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AMD ships microcode update to disable some branch prediction by Asdfbla on Friday January 05, 2018 @07:27PM (#16082995)
A for loop also is an implicit branch, by the way. At least it will be compiled to something with a conditional jump.

So being unsure about how many times you want to do a thing is a no-go too.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AMD ships microcode update to disable some branch prediction by pertymcpert on Friday January 05, 2018 @09:04PM (#16083419)
Not if it's a known constant trip count, then you can fully unroll it. No more branches!

If the trip count isn't known at compile time? You should find out.

[ Parent | on HN ]