lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Nov]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: spinlocks, the GPL, and binary-only modules
    On Thu, 21 Nov 2002, Mark Mielke wrote:

    > Some (not all) of the inlined functions are 'inline' to accelerate the
    > kernel.

    Point is noted and the performance issue stands on its own as a strike
    against removing the inline, this is a given. Now what is the performance
    difference if the inline is moved to a .c and makd and extern inline in
    the .h ?
    The object of the question is determine if there is a peformance break
    point to consider the moving of a inlined C code to a proper .c file.

    Obviously adding a new kernel fork to move around the inline game will be
    painful but if it narrows the gap between black and white to remove
    the chance of accidentail GPL code inclusion. It may be worth it to
    consider.

    Comments and Flames welcome.

    Cheers,

    Andre Hedrick
    LAD Storage Consulting Group


    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:31    [W:0.123 / U:0.180 seconds]
    ©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site