Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 10:31:32 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: "Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "'Andrew Morton'" <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: re-inline sched functions
Message-ID: <20050311093132.GA19954@elte.hu>
References: <200503110024.j2B0OFg06087@unix-os.sc.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <200503110024.j2B0OFg06087@unix-os.sc.intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 861
Lines: 24


* Chen, Kenneth W <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com> wrote:

> # size vmlinux.*
>    text    data     bss     dec     hex filename
> 3261844  717184  262020 4241048  40b698 vmlinux.x86.orig
> 3262772  717488  262020 4242280  40bb68 vmlinux.x86.inline

> Possible we can introduce them back?

> -static unsigned int task_timeslice(task_t *p)
> +static inline unsigned int task_timeslice(task_t *p)

the patch looks good except this one - could you try to undo it and
re-measure? task_timeslice() is not used in any true fastpath, if it
makes any difference then the performance difference must be some other
artifact.

	Ingo
-
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/