Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932111AbVLaJUa (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Dec 2005 04:20:30 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932112AbVLaJUa (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Dec 2005 04:20:30 -0500 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:28307 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932111AbVLaJU3 (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Dec 2005 04:20:29 -0500 Subject: Re: [patch 00/2] improve .text size on gcc 4.0 and newer compilers From: Arjan van de Ven To: Matt Mackall Cc: Andrew Morton , Ingo Molnar , torvalds@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20051230221222.GJ3356@waste.org> References: <20051228114637.GA3003@elte.hu> <1135798495.2935.29.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <20051228212313.GA4388@elte.hu> <20051228214845.GA7859@elte.hu> <20051228201150.b6cfca14.akpm@osdl.org> <20051230221222.GJ3356@waste.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2005 10:20:20 +0100 Message-Id: <1136020820.2901.17.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 (2.2.3-2.fc4) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -2.8 (--) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 3.0.4 on pentafluge.infradead.org summary: Content analysis details: (-2.8 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -2.8 ALL_TRUSTED Did not pass through any untrusted hosts X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1074 Lines: 23 On Fri, 2005-12-30 at 16:12 -0600, Matt Mackall wrote: > On Wed, Dec 28, 2005 at 08:11:50PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > If no-forced-inlining makes the kernel smaller then we probably have (yet > > more) incorrect inlining. We should hunt those down and fix them. We did > > quite a lot of this in 2.5.x/2.6.early. Didn't someone have a script which > > would identify which functions are a candidate for uninlining? > > It was a combination of a tool I wrote for -tiny, which added > deprecation warnings to inlines along with a post-processing tool to > count instantiations, nestings, etc., and a post-post-processing tool > written by Denis Vlasenko that guessed at the space usage. my current patch to deinline a bunch of big offenders is at http://www.fenrus.org/noinline (it's on the big side for lkml for now) - 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/