[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150422052441.GA395@x4>
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 07:24:41 +0200
From: Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@...ppelsdorf.de>
To: Hagen Paul Pfeifer <hagen@...u.net>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] x86: enforce inlining for atomics
On 2015.04.22 at 00:57 +0200, Hagen Paul Pfeifer wrote:
> We see ordinary "template" reuse of common driver code without renaming the
> copied static's. But compiled with CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING=y the inlining is
> not respected by gcc:
>
> atomic_inc: 544 duplicates
> rcu_read_unlock: 453 duplicates
> rcu_read_lock: 383 duplicates
> get_dma_ops: 271 duplicates
> arch_local_irq_restore: 258 duplicates
> atomic_dec: 215 duplicates
> kzalloc: 185 duplicates
> test_and_set_bit: 156 duplicates
> cpumask_check: 148 duplicates
> cpumask_next: 146 duplicates
> list_del: 131 duplicates
> kref_get: 126 duplicates
> test_and_clear_bit: 122 duplicates
> brelse: 122 duplicates
> schedule_work: 122 duplicates
> netif_tx_stop_queue: 115 duplicates
> atomic_dec_and_test: 107 duplicates
> dma_mapping_error: 105 duplicates
> list_del_init: 101 duplicates
> netif_stop_queue: 100 duplicates
> arch_local_save_flags: 98 duplicates
> tasklet_schedule: 76 duplicates
> clk_prepare_enable: 71 duplicates
> init_completion: 69 duplicates
> pskb_may_pull: 67 duplicates
> [...]
>
> Again, the used gcc version is "gcc (Debian 4.9.2-10) 4.9.2". So it is not
> outdated nor a legacy one. The inline heuristic seems really broken for some
> parts. Is it possible that gcc is bedeviled because of inline assembler
> parts which brings confuse the internal scoring system?
I cannot reproduce this issue with my config with 4.8, 4.9 or 5. Could
you please come up with a small testcase and open a gcc bug (with full
gcc command line)?
--
Markus
--
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