![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Andrew Morton wrote: > Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@kvack.org> wrote: > >>On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 01:43:08AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> > we dont inline that code anymore. So i think the optimization is fine. >> >> Why is that? It adds memory traffic that has to be synchronized >> before the lock occurs and clobbered registers now in the caller. > > > Is the inlined lock;decb+jns likely to worsen the text size? I doubt it. > Overall text will get bigger due to the out-of-line stuff, but that's OK. > > I'm sure we went over all this, but I don't recall the thinking. Seems like a very good idea not to clobber any registers in lock fastpaths. I don't see how that could have been a win (especially for i386) but still, Ingo must have had a reason behind it. -- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com - 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: 2006-03-08 09:54 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||