On Thu, Oct 11, 2007 at 10:04:19PM -0400, Kyle McMartin wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2007 at 11:23:39AM +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> > Olof Johansson writes:
> >
> > > Not using the ppc-specific WARN_ON/BUG_ON constructs actually saves about
> > > 4K text on a ppc64_defconfig. The main reason seems
On Fri, Oct 12, 2007 at 11:23:39AM +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> Olof Johansson writes:
>
> > Not using the ppc-specific WARN_ON/BUG_ON constructs actually saves about
> > 4K text on a ppc64_defconfig. The main reason seems to be that prepping
> > the arguments to the conditional trap instruction
On Fri, Oct 12, 2007 at 11:23:39AM +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> Olof Johansson writes:
>
> > Not using the ppc-specific WARN_ON/BUG_ON constructs actually saves about
> > 4K text on a ppc64_defconfig. The main reason seems to be that prepping
> > the arguments to the conditional trap instruction
Olof Johansson writes:
> Not using the ppc-specific WARN_ON/BUG_ON constructs actually saves about
> 4K text on a ppc64_defconfig. The main reason seems to be that prepping
> the arguments to the conditional trap instructions is more work than
> just doing a compare and branch.
It might be more i
On Thu, Oct 11, 2007 at 12:14:13PM -0500, Olof Johansson wrote:
> Not using the ppc-specific WARN_ON/BUG_ON constructs actually saves about
> 4K text on a ppc64_defconfig. The main reason seems to be that prepping
> the arguments to the conditional trap instructions is more work than
> just doing a
5 matches
Mail list logo