Re: [patch] measurements, numbers about CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING=y impact

2009-01-09 Thread Nicholas Miell
ace.c:10 (gdb) Maybe the kernel's backtrace code should be fixed instead of blaming gcc. -- Nicholas Miell -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [patch] measurements, numbers about CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING=y impact

2009-01-09 Thread Nicholas Miell
On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 12:29 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Fri, 9 Jan 2009, Nicholas Miell wrote: > > > > Maybe the kernel's backtrace code should be fixed instead of blaming > > gcc. > > And maybe people who don't know what they are talking about

Re: [patch] measurements, numbers about CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING=y impact

2009-01-09 Thread Nicholas Miell
On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 16:05 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Fri, 9 Jan 2009, Nicholas Miell wrote: > > > In the general case is it does nothing at all to debugging (beyond the > > usual weird control flow you get from any optimized code) -- the > > compiler genera

Re: [patch] measurements, numbers about CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING=y impact

2009-01-09 Thread Nicholas Miell
On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 20:05 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Fri, 9 Jan 2009, Nicholas Miell wrote: > > > > It's only too big if you always keep it in memory, and I wasn't > > suggesting that. > > Umm. We're talking kernel panics here. If it&#