Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Subject | Re: [TRIVIAL] kstrdup | From | Alan Cox <> | Date | 19 Apr 2003 13:27:21 +0100 |
| |
On Sad, 2003-04-19 at 05:48, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > Completely disagree. Write the most straightforward code possible, > > and then if there proves to be a problem, optimize. Optimizations > > where there's no actual performance problem should be left to the > > compiler. > > Since the kernel does its own string ops, the compiler does not have > enough information to deduce that further optimization is possible. > > > > Case in point: gcc-3.2 on -O2 on Intel is one instruction longer for > > your version. > > And? It's still slower.
You are arguing over a 1 instruction, probably sub 1 clock scheduling matter on a call which is not used on any fast or common path. If you shaved 1 clock off the timer handling instead you'd make a lot more difference..
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |