netdev - RE: [RFC] net: bpf_jit: Two pass JIT and other changes

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <AE90C24D6B3A694183C094C60CF0A2F6026B6ECF@saturn3.aculab.com>
Date:	Mon, 2 Apr 2012 10:28:07 +0100
From:	"David Laight" <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:	"Indan Zupancic" <indan@....nu>,
	"Eric Dumazet" <eric.dumazet@...il.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [RFC] net: bpf_jit: Two pass JIT and other changes

 
> 1) Sadly, gcc isn't always smart enough to inline emit_code().
>    So turn it into a macro to force gcc to inline it. This saves
>    about 500 bytes. Tested with gcc 4.6.0. An alternative to the
>    macro would be to create inline emit_code1(), emit_code2() etc.

Does giving it the __attribute__((always_inline)) help?
I had to mark a load of small static functions that way
after a minor change (possibly to the overall size)
stopped gcc inlining everything.

I have also noticed in the past that gcc tends to generate
better code for #define than when inlining functions.

	David


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html