[lkml]   [2006]   [Feb]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Patch to reorder functions in the vmlinux to a defined order

On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> I think that to get to a better list we need to invite people to submit
> their own profiles, and somehow add those all up and base the final list on
> that. I'm willing to do that effort if this is ends up being the prefered
> approach. Such an effort probably needs to be repeated like once a year or
> so to adopt to the changing nature of the kernel.

I suspect we need architecture-specific profiles.

For example, on x86(-64), memcpy() is mostly inlined for the interesting
cases. That's not always so. Other architectures will have things like the
page copying and clearing as _the_ hottest functions. Same goes for
architecture-specific things like context switching etc, that have
different names on different architectures.

So putting the profile data in scripts/ doesn't sound very good.

That said, this certainly seems simple enough. I'd like to hear about
actual performance improvements with it before I'd apply anything like

Also, since it's quite possible that being dense in the I$ is more of an
issue than being dense in the TLB (especially since almost everybody has
super-pages for kernel TLB entries and thus uses just a single entry - or
maybe a couple - for the kernel), it would probably make sense to try to
take calling patterns into account some way.

That's true of TLB usage too (in the absense of super-pages), of course.

But numbers talk.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-11-18 23:46    [W:0.230 / U:11.668 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site