Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8]: uninline & uninline

2008-02-23 Thread Andi Kleen
> Is it possible to catch this automatically, like, by re-defining > likely/unlikely to the raw form in specific file(s)? Sure it would be possible to define a IN_VDSO symbol in all vdso related files and then do that. Might be useful for other things too. vdso has some very specific requirements.

RE: [RFC PATCH 0/8]: uninline & uninline

2008-02-23 Thread Hua Zhong
> > Is there any reason they couldn't just be merged to mainline? > > > > I think it's a useful facility. > > ummm, now why did we made that decision... I think we decided that > it's the sort of thing which one person can run once per few months > and that will deliver its full value. I can mai

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8]: uninline & uninline

2008-02-23 Thread Andrew Morton
On Sat, 23 Feb 2008 14:15:06 +0100 Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >> -41525 2066 f, 3370 +, 44895 -, diff: -41525 IS_ERR > > > > This is a surprise. I expect that the -mm-only > > profile-likely-unlikely-macros.patch is the cause of th

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8]: uninline & uninline

2008-02-23 Thread Ilpo Järvinen
On Sat, 23 Feb 2008, Andi Kleen wrote: > Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >> -41525 2066 f, 3370 +, 44895 -, diff: -41525 IS_ERR > > > > This is a surprise. I expect that the -mm-only > > profile-likely-unlikely-macros.patch is the cause of this and mainline > > doesn't have t

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8]: uninline & uninline

2008-02-23 Thread Andi Kleen
Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> -41525 2066 f, 3370 +, 44895 -, diff: -41525 IS_ERR > > This is a surprise. I expect that the -mm-only > profile-likely-unlikely-macros.patch is the cause of this and mainline > doesn't have this problem. Shouldn't they only have overhead when the

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8]: uninline & uninline

2008-02-23 Thread Ilpo Järvinen
On Sat, 23 Feb 2008, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 15:47:10 +0200 "Ilpo J__rvinen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > -41525 2066 f, 3370 +, 44895 -, diff: -41525 IS_ERR > > This is a surprise. It surprised me as well, there were something like 10 bytes I just couldn't explain i

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8]: uninline & uninline

2008-02-23 Thread Andrew Morton
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 15:47:10 +0200 "Ilpo J__rvinen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ok, here's the top of the list (1+ bytes): This is good stuff - thanks. > -41525 2066 f, 3370 +, 44895 -, diff: -41525 IS_ERR This is a surprise. I expect that the -mm-only profile-likely-unlikely-macros.pa