Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030199AbVI1DBa (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Sep 2005 23:01:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030200AbVI1DBa (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Sep 2005 23:01:30 -0400 Received: from nproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.182.195]:47115 "EHLO nproxy.gmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030199AbVI1DB3 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Sep 2005 23:01:29 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=NZzAv5q0G/1VnuTvZYexSpCNlgsdwx89H5lb15bCxKNPrPdLgCVKmP3L8I0SPBgoblogmda8v5XHp1lsegKuLUTZgIrDO2is6/BBs7Yoo/nxrcXgN4Quj+nieblBxKzNw2U4WDjc8xCA4D+8ZI82Ku84ed28xwlL9Qb//Hvwd1M= Message-ID: <2cd57c90050927200118eb9ade@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 11:01:25 +0800 From: Coywolf Qi Hunt Reply-To: Coywolf Qi Hunt To: Nick Piggin Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] inline a few tiny functions in init/initramfs.c Cc: Jesper Juhl , Con Kolivas , lkml In-Reply-To: <1127872565.5210.4.camel@npiggin-nld.site> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Disposition: inline References: <200509240126.26575.jesper.juhl@gmail.com> <200509241415.43773.kernel@kolivas.org> <4334DB96.3040904@yahoo.com.au> <9a87484905092717074e85657e@mail.gmail.com> <1127872565.5210.4.camel@npiggin-nld.site> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1044 Lines: 27 On 9/28/05, Nick Piggin wrote: > On Wed, 2005-09-28 at 02:07 +0200, Jesper Juhl wrote: > > > Ok, so it seems that there's agreement that the other two inlines in > > the patch makes sense, but the malloc() is not clear cut. > > > > Since this is in initramfs after all it doesn't make that big a > > difference overall, so I'll just send in a patch that inlines the > > other two functions but leaves malloc() alone. > > > > Well, they're not particularly performance critical, and everything > is marked init anyway so I don't know why you would bother changing > anything ;) > Don't you feel "static inline void __init " stupid? (inline + __init) Anyway don't do things like that manually. Leave the optimization job to gcc. -- Coywolf Qi Hunt http://sosdg.org/~coywolf/ - 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/