On 05/20/2015 08:56 PM, Brian Norris wrote: > On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 12:58:40PM +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: >> With this .config: http://busybox.net/~vda/kernel_config, >> after uninlining these functions have sizes and callsite counts >> as follows: > > Most of this is probably good, thanks. But I'm curious about one: > >> cfi_udelay(): 74 bytes, 26 callsites > > ^^ This is pretty dead-simple. If it's generating bad code, we might > look at fixing it up instead. Almost all of its call sites are with > constant input, so it *should* just become: > > udelay(1); > cond_resched(); > > in most cases. For the non-constant cases, we might still do an > out-of-line implementation. Or maybe we just say it's all not worth it, > and we just stick with what you have. But I'd like to consider > alternatives to out-lining this one.
You want to consider not-deinlining (IOW: speed-optimizing) a *fixed time delay function*? Think about what delay functions do... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
