lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Mar]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: re-inline sched functions

* Chen, Kenneth W <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com> wrote:

> Ingo Molnar wrote on Friday, March 11, 2005 1:32 AM
> > > -static unsigned int task_timeslice(task_t *p)
> > > +static inline unsigned int task_timeslice(task_t *p)
> >
> > the patch looks good except this one - could you try to undo it and
> > re-measure? task_timeslice() is not used in any true fastpath, if it
> > makes any difference then the performance difference must be some other
> > artifact.
>
> Chen, Kenneth W wrote on Friday, March 11, 2005 10:40 AM
> > OK, I'll re-measure. Yeah, I agree that this function is not in the fastpath.
>
> Ingo is right, re-measured on our benchmark setup and did not see any
> difference whether task_timeslice is inlined or not. So if people
> want to take inline keyword out for that function, we won't complain
> :-)

Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>

uninline task_timeslice() - reduces code footprint noticeably, and it's
slowpath code.

--- kernel/sched.c.orig
+++ kernel/sched.c
@@ -166,7 +166,7 @@
#define SCALE_PRIO(x, prio) \
max(x * (MAX_PRIO - prio) / (MAX_USER_PRIO/2), MIN_TIMESLICE)

-static inline unsigned int task_timeslice(task_t *p)
+static unsigned int task_timeslice(task_t *p)
{
if (p->static_prio < NICE_TO_PRIO(0))
return SCALE_PRIO(DEF_TIMESLICE*4, p->static_prio);
-
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: 2005-04-06 13:30    [W:0.034 / U:0.148 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site