On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 11:50:41AM +0100, J?rn Engel wrote: > > For my kernel, there would be 92 removals if the condition at the > price of 135 bytes of extra object code. Some of the removals would > be in modules, so the numbers are not exactly fair.
IMHO source saving is cheap while binary bloat isn't. > Another interesting question is: Why is kfree_skb inline in the first > place? After uninlining it, my patch would debloat both source and > object code by a bit: > > -rwxr-xr-x 1 joern src 4824435 Feb 23 11:46 vmlinux > > 12157 bytes gained. Plus a bit more when the 92 conditionals are > removed. Now there's a good idea. After all, the great majority of callers of kfree_skb expect to free the skb. Dave, what do you think? Cheers, -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
