[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1011251454430.996@blackhole.kfki.hu>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2010 14:57:34 +0100 (CET)
From: Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@...ckhole.kfki.hu>
To: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ozas.de>
cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Prepare the tree for un-inlined jhash.
On Thu, 25 Nov 2010, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Thursday 2010-11-25 14:15, Jozsef Kadlecsik wrote:
>
> >jhash is widely used in the kernel and because the functions
> >are inlined, the cost in size is significant. Also, the new jhash
> >functions are slightly larger than the previous ones so better un-inline.
> >As a preparation step, the calls to the internal macros are replaced
> >with the plain jhash function calls.
>
> Do you have a non-normative allyesconfig/allmodconfig build whose
> size(1) you can run on, to show approximately just how much it differs?
In the cover mail I referred the link to the message from Ilpo Jarvinen:
"I once looked into inlining cost and jhash functions were among the most
wasteful (kernel-wide). Multiple jhash bodies were 100+ bytes, and the
overall cost was 10k+."
Best regards,
Jozsef
-
E-mail : kadlec@...ckhole.kfki.hu, kadlec@...l.kfki.hu
PGP key : http://www.kfki.hu/~kadlec/pgp_public_key.txt
Address : KFKI Research Institute for Particle and Nuclear Physics
H-1525 Budapest 114, POB. 49, Hungary
--
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