[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0901091206460.17378@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 12:07:59 -0500 (EST)
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
cc: Dirk Hohndel <hohndel@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
jim owens <jowens@...com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
Peter Morreale <pmorreale@...ell.com>,
Sven Dietrich <SDietrich@...ell.com>
Subject: Re: [patch] measurements, numbers about CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING=y
impact
On Fri, 9 Jan 2009, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Dirk Hohndel wrote:
> >
> > Does gcc actually follow the "promise"? If that's the case (and if it's
> > considered a bug when it doesn't), then we can get what Linus wants by
> > annotating EVERY function with either __always_inline or noinline.
> >
>
> __always_inline and noinline does work.
I vote for the, get rid of the current inline, rename __always_inline to
inline, and then remove all non needed inlines from the kernel.
We'll, probably start adding a lot more noinlines.
-- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists