From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <alyapunov@tarantool.org>
Received: from smtp32.i.mail.ru (smtp32.i.mail.ru [94.100.177.92])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by dev.tarantool.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 86B33469710
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Thu, 21 May 2020 11:28:48 +0300 (MSK)
References: <cover.1589583614.git.v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org>
 <172feb69ec2caea2aa63a24de8b76a4dba13bebb.1589583614.git.v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org>
 <52af1bb7-b125-7490-3882-ce74698789d2@tarantool.org>
 <e7a1a29d-c30b-9800-b55f-0f9ce00f8c4e@tarantool.org>
 <f0774d12-0fdd-c922-05e3-e299640d6187@tarantool.org>
 <c1062358-5950-0e31-a729-7d813aa214ac@tarantool.org>
 <2aa9c7d1-7364-3280-021f-6ece877fc90f@tarantool.org>
 <7cebd705-c3b9-a7b5-a244-2383da5520e9@tarantool.org>
From: Aleksandr Lyapunov <alyapunov@tarantool.org>
Message-ID: <bf2205e5-748a-db81-b806-da1c94825dd3@tarantool.org>
Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 11:28:47 +0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <7cebd705-c3b9-a7b5-a244-2383da5520e9@tarantool.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH 2/2] uuid: fix unaligned memory
	access
List-Id: Tarantool development patches <tarantool-patches.dev.tarantool.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.tarantool.org/mailman/options/tarantool-patches>, 
 <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.tarantool.org/pipermail/tarantool-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.tarantool.org/mailman/listinfo/tarantool-patches>, 
 <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Vladislav Shpilevoy <v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org>, tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org, tsafin@tarantool.org, gorcunov@gmail.com

The first commit lgtm too.
Sorry, I was meant to approve it one I checked it about a week ago
and examined the performance too.
I found out that on some platforms (at least on Xeon Gold) you
solution for bit_set is even faster.

On 5/21/20 12:38 AM, Vladislav Shpilevoy wrote:
> Only the second commit? Did you look at the first commit, for lib/bit?
>
> On 20/05/2020 10:18, Aleksandr Lyapunov wrote:
>> Thanks for the changes! Perfect with uuid_nil, lgtm.