Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265608AbUFDFEs (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Jun 2004 01:04:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265607AbUFDFEs (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Jun 2004 01:04:48 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:30350 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265609AbUFDFEp (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Jun 2004 01:04:45 -0400 Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2004 22:01:07 -0700 From: "David S. Miller" To: Paul Jackson Cc: akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ak@muc.de, ashok.raj@intel.com, hch@infradead.org, jbarnes@sgi.com, joe.korty@ccur.com, manfred@colorfullife.com, colpatch@us.ibm.com, mikpe@csd.uu.se, nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, Simon.Derr@bull.net, wli@holomorphy.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpumask 5/10 rewrite cpumask.h - single bitmap based implementation Message-Id: <20040603220107.7590cbcc.davem@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20040603220224.73cd8d44.pj@sgi.com> References: <20040603094339.03ddfd42.pj@sgi.com> <20040603101010.4b15734a.pj@sgi.com> <20040603170725.4b3f8b34.akpm@osdl.org> <20040603194755.667e584b.pj@sgi.com> <20040603195409.11d4aec2.davem@redhat.com> <20040603220224.73cd8d44.pj@sgi.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.11 (GTK+ 1.2.10; sparc-unknown-linux-gnu) X-Face: "_;p5u5aPsO,_Vsx"^v-pEq09'CU4&Dc1$fQExov$62l60cgCc%FnIwD=.UF^a>?5'9Kn[;433QFVV9M..2eN.@4ZWPGbdi<=?[:T>y?SD(R*-3It"Vj:)"dP Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1018 Lines: 24 On Thu, 3 Jun 2004 22:02:24 -0700 Paul Jackson wrote: > The generic only is quite a bit simpler - it has some 26 fewer kernel > source files, and it saves sparc64 some 1144 bytes of kernel text space, > as measured by Andrew. I bet if you do a sparc32 build, you'll get larger text size and more leaf functions will need stack frames. > I really don't want to go 'back' to the fancy version. If a particular > architecture has specific additional needs, I'm certainly open to > hearing the justifications, tradeoffs and suggestions for ways to meet > those needs. Another thing is that only newer gcc's are good at changing structure accesses such that they are optimized as aggregates when possible. You're the one doing the work, so it's up to you. :-) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/