Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Wed, 20 Sep 2000 01:55:58 +0200 | From | Martin Dalecki <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] abuse of macros in swab.h |
| |
Andi Kleen wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 07:13:31PM -0400, Alexander Viro wrote: > > Nice spotting, but bad fix, IMO. swab...() stuff is a perfect example of > > the dangerous use of macros. BTW, 2.4 has the same problem. > > inlines usually generate worse code than macros (the gcc manual lies on that), > e.g. the register allocation is usually worse and CSE doesn't work that well. > Normally it makes not that much difference, but these macros are rather > performance critical.
The GCC manual doesn't lie on that ANY LONGER with respect to EGCS. And we should adpat for the modern versions of the compiler instead of dragging the *ugly* code with us until the earth stops spinning, iff the only concern is performance.
> > Better would be to use statement blocks like > #define bla(x) ({ __u32 tmp__ = (x); ....; tmp__; }) > > I would prefer to fix the callers anyways, because it is clearer this way. > > -Andi > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
-- - phone: +49 214 8656 283 - job: STOCK-WORLD Media AG, LEV .de (MY OPPINNIONS ARE MY OWN!) - langs: de_DE.ISO8859-1, en_US, pl_PL.ISO8859-2, last ressort: ru_RU.KOI8-R - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |