[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:0.082 / U:4.180 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site