linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] tracing/module: Move tracepoint out of module.h

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 31 Jan 2012 07:50:30 -0500
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] tracing/module: Move tracepoint out of module.h

On Tue, 2012-01-31 at 13:20 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:

> > Saves only 400 bytes of text here, but I don't do preempt or 
> > tracepoints.
> 
> Most distro kernels do tracepoints so I guess that's where the 
> size delta comes from :-) In any case:

Yes, having tracepoints inlined causes a lot of bloat. But I still did
get a 1799 bytes savings between moving the tracepoint out of line but
keeping the if, and totally moving the entire functions out of line. Not
sure what the discrepancy was there.

My last set of numbers came from the default 3.0.0 Debian config, which
probably adds more things that call these functions into the kernel
proper?

But anway, I think this bike shed is complete ;-)

> 
> Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>

Acked-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>

-- Steve


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/