Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 3 Jul 2006 00:55:42 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] genirq: ARM dyntick cleanup |
| |
On Mon, 3 Jul 2006 08:41:55 +0100 Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 02, 2006 at 05:35:27PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > This is not exactly a thing of beauty either. It's much cleaner to use > > __attribute__((weak)), but that will add an empty call-return to everyone's > > interrupts. > > Let's not go overboard with the weak stuff - it does not get removed > at link time, so it remains as dead code in the kernel image.
Well.
void handle_dynamic_tick(struct irqaction *action) { }
consumes one byte, doesn't it? That's not very far overboard ;)
And we can optimise away that byte by doing what we do with cond_syscall(). - 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/
| |