Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 30 Jun 2005 02:11:11 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] deinline sleep/delay functions |
| |
Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 08:52:25AM +0300, Denis Vlasenko wrote: > > Hi Andrew, > > > > Optimizing delay functions for speed is utterly pointless. > > > > This patch turns ssleep(n), mdelay(n), udelay(n) and ndelay(n) > > into functions, thus they generate the smallest possible code > > at the callsite. Previously they were more or less inlined. > > > > Run tested. Saved a few kb off vmlinux. > > > > Signed-off-by: Denis Vlasenko <vda@ilport.com.ua> > > Rejected-by: Russell King 8) > > The reason is that now we're unable to find out if anyone's doing > udelay(100000000000000000) which breaks on most architectures. > > There are a number of compile-time checks that your patch has removed > which catch such things, and as such your patch is not acceptable. > Some architectures have a lower threshold of acceptability for the > maximum udelay value, so it's absolutely necessary to keep this.
It removes that check from x86 - other architectures retain it.
I don't recall seeing anyone trigger the check, and it hardly seems worth adding a "few kb" to vmlinux for it? - 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/
| |