lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Nov]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: Some functions are not inlined by gcc 3.2, resulting code is ugly
    Date
    On 3 November 2002 14:21, Alan Cox wrote:
    > On Sun, 2002-11-03 at 15:37, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
    > > On Sun, Nov 03, 2002 at 04:14:26PM -0200, Denis Vlasenko wrote:
    > > > Here is the cure: force_inline will guarantee inlining.
    > > >
    > > > To use _only_ with functions which meant to be almost
    > > > optimized away to nothing but are large and gcc might decide
    > > > they are _too_ large for inlining.
    > >
    > > Well, you can as well bump -finline-limit, like
    > > -finline-limit=2000. The default is too low for kernel code (and
    > > glibc too).
    >
    > I would venture the reverse interpretation for modern processors, the
    > kernel inlines far far too much

    I agree that there are far too many large inlines. But.

    __constant_c_and_count_memset *has to* be inlined.
    There is large switch statement which meant to be optimized out.
    It does optimize out *only if* count is compile-time constant.
    --
    vda
    -
    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 13:30    [W:0.023 / U:32.708 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site