lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Sep]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 10/10] check pr_debug() arguments

>> This results in a seemingly insignificant code size increase. A x86-64
>> allyesconfig:
>>
>> text data bss dec hex filename
>> 25354768 7191098 4854720 37400586 23ab00a vmlinux.before
>> 25354945 7191138 4854720 37400803 23ab0e3 vmlinux
>
> Which would indicate that we might have expressions-with-side-effects
> inside pr_debug() statements somewhere, which is risky. I wonder where?

I browsed through some of the functions that bloat-o-meter reported an
increase for. Some seemed reasonable as they used things like current
or AFFS_I() in arguments. Others seemed pretty mysterious as they
didn't have obvious pr_debug() calls.

$ uname -m ; gcc --version
x86_64
gcc (GCC) 4.1.1 20060525 (Red Hat 4.1.1-1)

> btw, what's up with aio.c using a combination of pr_debug() and dprintk(),
> and a combination of `#ifdef DEBUG' and `#if DEBUG > 1'? Confusing.

I'm not sure how it got that way but I don't think anyone will object to
simplifying it. I'll spend those 5 minutes :).

> It would be nice to have a single way of doing developer-debug in-tree. We
> have 182(!) different definitions of dprintk(). Please nobody cc me on that
> discussion though ;)

Agreed, on both counts :).

- z

-
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: 2006-09-11 20:39    [W:0.056 / U:0.496 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site