On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 12:27:47PM -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote: A> >> > .. and actually, bikeshedding for a moment, would we be able to move a A> >> > lot of these accessor methods over to inlines? Would that break the A> >> > Juniper way of doing things? A> >> A> >> That would definitely break Juniper as it doesn't give a stable A> >> ABI. A> >> A> >> I've suggested an approach that allows for both, but it was deemed A> >> unnecessary. The argument being that the function call overhead is A> >> negligible. A> >> A> >> We can always revisit that decision if needed... A> >> A> > A> > In my experience, function call overhead is anything but minimal, A> > especially on ARM platforms. A> A> Same on MIPS.
And same on amd64. While benchmarking the counter(9), I even encountered artifacts when function call was faster than inline. Of course, function call shouldn't be via a pointer. -- Totus tuus, Glebius. _______________________________________________ svn-src-all@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
