[lkml]   [2005]   [Dec]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [patch 2/3] mutex subsystem: fastpath inlining

    * Nicolas Pitre <> wrote:

    > > * Nicolas Pitre <> wrote:
    > >
    > > > Some architectures, notably ARM for instance, might benefit from
    > > > inlining the mutex fast paths. [...]
    > >
    > > what is the effect on text size? Could you post the before- and
    > > after-patch vmlinux 'size kernel/test.o' output in the nondebug case,
    > > with Arjan's latest 'convert a couple of semaphore users to mutexes'
    > > patch applied? [make sure you've got enough of those users compiled in,
    > > so that the inlining cost is truly measured. Perhaps also do
    > > before/after 'size' output of a few affected .o files, without mixing
    > > kernel/mutex.o into it, like vmlinux does.]
    > Theory should be convincing enough. [...]

    please provide actual measurements (just a simple pre-patch and
    post-patch 'size' output of vmlinux is enough), so that we can see the
    inlining cost. Note that x86 went to a non-inlined fastpath _despite_
    having a compact CISC semaphore fastpath.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-12-28 08:44    [W:0.034 / U:0.292 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site