Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Wed, 28 Dec 2005 08:41:54 +0100 | | From | Ingo Molnar <> | | Subject | Re: [patch 2/3] mutex subsystem: fastpath inlining |
| |
* Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> wrote:
> > * Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> 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.
Ingo - 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/
|  |