Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [patch 1/3] move WARN_ON() out of line | From | Matt Mackall <> | Date | Wed, 02 Jan 2008 19:59:29 -0600 |
| |
On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 01:56 +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > Subject: move WARN_ON() out of line > From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com> > CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> > CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> > > A quick grep shows that there are currently 1145 instances of WARN_ON > in the kernel. Currently, WARN_ON is pretty much entirely inlined, > which makes it hard to enhance it without growing the size of the kernel > (and getting Andrew unhappy). > > This patch moves WARN_ON() out of line entirely. I've considered keeping > the test inline and moving only the slowpath out of line, but I decided > against that: an out of line test reduces the pressure on the CPUs > branch predictor logic and gives smaller code, while a function call > to a fixed location is quite fast. Likewise I've considered doing something > similar to BUG() (eg use a trapping instruction) but that's not really > better (it needs the test inline again and recovering from an invalid > instruction isn't quite fun). > > The code size reduction of this patch was about 6.5Kb (on a distro style > .config): > > text data bss dec hex filename > 3096493 293455 2760704 6150652 5dd9fc vmlinux.before > 3090006 293455 2760704 6144165 5dc0a5 vmlinux.after > > Signed-off-by: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
I hate the do_foo naming scheme (how about __warn_on?), but otherwise:
Acked-by: Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>
> + printk(KERN_WARNING "WARNING: at %s:%d %s()\n", > + __FILE__, __LINE__, __FUNCTION__); > + dump_stack();
While we're here, I'll mention that dump_stack probably ought to take a severity level argument.
-- Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.
| |