lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: spinlocks -- why are releases inlined and acquires are not?

* Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz> wrote:

> > What is the reason for this asymetry? Shouldn't the acquiring
> > functions be implemented in the very same way? Or at least,
> > shouldn't all the __lockfunc functions be inlined?
>
> i.e. is there any particular reason why we don't have something like
> the patch below (implemented for all the lock variants of course, this
> is just to demonstrate what I mean)?

IIRC the main reason we decided to uninline them was image size. So i'd
suggest for you to check how this change impacts vmlinux size (on both
64-bit and 32-bit), a typical distro config (or allyesconfig with lock
debugging disabled).

If you do the test on x86.git/latest you'll also have the
CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING=y and CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE=y combination
as well, which generates the most compact x86 kernel image ever.

Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-04-01 10:37    [W:0.041 / U:0.916 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site