lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Jul]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] genirq: ARM dyntick cleanup
    On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 12:55:42AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
    > On Mon, 3 Jul 2006 08:41:55 +0100
    > Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
    >
    > > On Sun, Jul 02, 2006 at 05:35:27PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
    > > > This is not exactly a thing of beauty either. It's much cleaner to use
    > > > __attribute__((weak)), but that will add an empty call-return to everyone's
    > > > interrupts.
    > >
    > > Let's not go overboard with the weak stuff - it does not get removed
    > > at link time, so it remains as dead code in the kernel image.
    >
    > Well.
    >
    > void handle_dynamic_tick(struct irqaction *action)
    > {
    > }
    >
    > consumes one byte, doesn't it? That's not very far overboard ;)

    ROTFL!

    All the word isn't x86. On ARM it's 3 words for the stack setup and
    one for the tear down, so 16 bytes, assuming the function doesn't
    return a value. If it does, add another 4 bytes.

    So, on ARM potentially 16 to 20 bytes per weak function. That's a
    1600% to 2000% increase on your estimate.

    (Unfortunately we have to tell the compiler to always generate stack
    frames otherwise we can't get call traces out of the kernel.)

    --
    Russell King
    Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
    maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core
    -
    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: 2006-07-03 11:06    [W:0.021 / U:3.032 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site