![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 01:18:20PM +0200, Andreas Mohr wrote: > > [manual reply, no access to original content] > > Hi, > > rather NACKish here (from my minor side, that is, since there are no > useful explanations, and in the case of a lack of explanations no > backing numbers either which would have been helpful to resolve this ;). > > "x86: add optimized inlining" > (http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/git-commits-head/2008/4/26/1612644) > does not really say anything relevant to your patch, AFAICS. > > That one simply says that previously every inline was force-inlined (ugh), > which now gcc is allowed to properly decide by itself now. This, however, > does _NOT_ imply that it's now somehow fully sufficient for a perfect outcome > to simply remove all open-coded "inline"s. They both do the same - gcc is no longer forced to inline these functions. With either my patch or the "optimized inlining" it's 100% gcc's choice whether or not to inline functions marked as "inline" in kernel/sched* . If you didn't complain when "x86: add optimized inlining" got into Linus' tree you can't validly complain about my patch. > Just my thoughts (keep it or burn it), > > Andreas Mohr cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2008-05-11 14:55 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||