[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <DC4D133C-42B3-4CE3-A7A9-C507AE8A0B92@mac.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 03:44:24 -0400
From: Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@....com>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Michael Holzheu <holzheu@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>,
Dick Streefland <dick.streefland@...ium.nl>,
Jesse Barnes <jesse.barnes@...el.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>,
Emil Medve <Emilian.Medve@...escale.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux@...izon.com" <linux@...izon.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] New kernel-message logging API (take 2)
On Sep 28, 2007, at 03:31:11, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Can't you store the loglevel in the kprint_block and check it in
> all successive kprint_*() macros? If gcc knows it's constant, it
> can optimize the non-wanted code away. As other fields in struct
> kprint_block cannot be constant (they store internal state), you
> have to split it like:
>
> struct kprint_block {
> int loglevel;
> struct real_kprint_block real; /* internal state */
> }
>
> and pass &block.real() instead of &block to all successive internal
> functions. I haven't tried this, so let's hope gcc is actually
> smart enough...
Well actually, I believe you could just do:
struct kprint_block {
const int loglevel;
[...];
};
Then cast away the constness to actually set it initially:
*((int *)&block.loglevel) = LOGLEVEL;
Cheers,
Kyle Moffett
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists