Hi Matt, Thanks for your review.
Le Mon, 11 Feb 2008 13:01:18 -0600, Matt Mackall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit : > Looks ok. Please preserve original authorship (ie me) in some fashion > in your description. Andrew seems to already have picked up the patch in -mm (I received an e-mail + x86-configurable-dmi-scanning-code.patch added to -mm tree). If I resend a new one with proper credits, will Andrew pick it up and replace the old version by the new version ? > > On top of this patch, I've tested if removing the big dmi tables in > > the code (for example in arch/x86/kernel/reboot.c) would allow to > > make more space optimizations. However, it seems that simply > > defining dmi_check_system() to an empty static inlined function > > already allows gcc to optimize out the dmi tables, because there > > are not present in the code. Is that possible, or is my > > understanding incorrect ? > > That's possible with modern gccs, yes. I was compiling with 4.2.3, which I suppose is a modern gcc. Thanks, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons Free Embedded Linux Training Materials on http://free-electrons.com/training (More than 1500 pages!)
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
