[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAOJsxLF453qWJitGGjn+gMcJwXdXo4wLtmGzhVYJ3j5xOYNHWg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2015 22:42:22 +0200
From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>
To: Daniel Sanders <Daniel.Sanders@...tec.com>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] LLVMLinux: Correct size_index table before replacing
the bootstrap kmem_cache_node.
On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 10:38 PM, Daniel Sanders
<Daniel.Sanders@...tec.com> wrote:
> I don't believe the bug to be LLVM specific but GCC doesn't normally encounter the problem. I haven't been able to identify exactly what GCC is doing better (probably inlining) but it seems that GCC is managing to optimize to the point that it eliminates the problematic allocations. This theory is supported by the fact that GCC can be made to fail in the same way by changing inline, __inline, __inline__, and __always_inline in include/linux/compiler-gcc.h such that they don't actually inline things.
OK, makes sense. Please include that explanation in the changelog and
drop use proper "slab" prefix instead of the confusing "LLVMLinux"
prefix in the subject line.
- Pekka
--
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