Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 28 Dec 2000 19:14:34 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 28 Dec 2000 19:14:24 -0500 Received: from Cantor.suse.de ([194.112.123.193]:42500 "HELO Cantor.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Thu, 28 Dec 2000 19:14:15 -0500 Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 00:43:47 +0100 From: Andi Kleen To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Andi Kleen , Marcelo Tosatti , Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: test13-pre5 Message-ID: <20001229004347.B28063@gruyere.muc.suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20001229002527.C25388@gruyere.muc.suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from torvalds@transmeta.com on Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 03:37:51PM -0800 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 03:37:51PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > Hopefully all the "goto out" micro optimizations can be taken out then too, > > "goto out" often generates much more readable code, so the optimization is > secondary. I was more thinking of cases like the scheduler's gotos, which has gotten rather spagetti recently. Admittedly classic goto out is often more readable than many nested if()s with error handling. > > > I recently found out that gcc 2.97's block moving pass has the tendency > > to move the outlined blocks inline again ;) > > Too bad. Maybe somebody should tell gcc maintainers about programmers that > know more than the compiler again. In x86-64 which relies on 2.97 I'm using __builtin_expect, defined to likely() and unlikely(), which seems to generate good code. -Andi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/