article: update title of pointer-params

README.md

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
 
 ## Table of Content
 
-- [Changkun Ou. Pointer Type May Not Be Ideal for Parameters. Oct 27, 2020.](./pointer-params.md)
+- [Changkun Ou. Pointers Might Not Be Ideal for Parameters. Oct 27, 2020.](./pointer-params.md)
 - [Changkun Ou. Eliminating A Source of Measurement Errors in Benchmarks. Sep 30, 2020.](./bench-time.md)
 
 ## License

pointer-params.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# Pointer Type May Not Be Ideal for Parameters
+# Pointers Might Not Be Ideal for Parameters
 
 Author(s): [Changkun Ou](https://changkun.de)
 
@@ -209,9 +209,9 @@ The dumped assumbly code is as follows:
 
 The `addv` implementation uses values from the previous stack frame and
 writes the result directly to the return; whereas `addp` needs MOVQ that
-copies the parameter to different registers (e.g., copy pointers to AX and CX,),
-then write back when returning. Therefore, another unexpected cost in
-`addp` is caused by the indirect addressing mode for accessing the memory unit.
+copies the parameter to different registers (e.g., copy pointers to AX and CX),
+then write back when returning. Therefore, with inline disabled, the reason that `addv` 
+is slower than `addp` is caused by different memory access pattern.
 
 ## Further Reading Suggestions
 

pointer-params/Makefile

@@ -2,5 +2,5 @@ GOVERSION=$(shell go version | awk '{print $$3}')
 all:
 	perflock -governor 80% go test -v -run=none -bench=. -count=10 | tee $(GOVERSION).txt
 	benchstat $(GOVERSION).txt
-asm:
-	mkdir asm && go tool compile -S vec.go > asm/vec.s
+assembly:
+	go tool compile -S vec.go > asm/vec.s