Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932283AbVLaOiD (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Dec 2005 09:38:03 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932292AbVLaOiD (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Dec 2005 09:38:03 -0500 Received: from emailhub.stusta.mhn.de ([141.84.69.5]:20492 "HELO mailout.stusta.mhn.de") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S932283AbVLaOiB (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Dec 2005 09:38:01 -0500 Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2005 15:38:00 +0100 From: Adrian Bunk To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Tim Schmielau , Arjan van de Ven , Linus Torvalds , Dave Jones , Andrew Morton , lkml , mpm@selenic.com Subject: Re: [patch 00/2] improve .text size on gcc 4.0 and newer compilers Message-ID: <20051231143800.GJ3811@stusta.de> References: <20051228201150.b6cfca14.akpm@osdl.org> <20051229073259.GA20177@elte.hu> <20051229202852.GE12056@redhat.com> <20051229224839.GA12247@elte.hu> <1135897092.2935.81.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <20051230074916.GC25637@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051230074916.GC25637@elte.hu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1661 Lines: 46 On Fri, Dec 30, 2005 at 08:49:16AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Tim Schmielau wrote: > > > What about the previous suggestion to remove inline from *all* static > > inline functions in .c files? > > i think this is a way too static approach. Why go from one extreme to > the other, when my 3 simple patches (which arguably create a more > flexible scenario) gives us savings of 7.7%? This point only discusses the inline change, which were (without unit-at-a-time) in your measurements 2.9%. Your patch might be simple, but it also might have side effects in cases where we _really_ want the code forced to be inlined. How simple is it to prove that your uninline patch doesn't cause a subtle breakage somewhere? inline's in .c files are nearly always wrong (there might be very few exceptions), and this should simply be fixed. Applying Arjan's uninlining patch [1] against 2.6.15-rc5-mm3 (ignoring a few rejects at applying the patch), I'm getting more than 0.6% .text savings (this is with a "compile everything .config", without unit-at-a-time and with -Os). > Ingo cu Adrian [1] http://www.fenrus.org/noinline -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed - 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/