Re: [patch] measurements, numbers about CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING=yimpact

[H. Peter Anvin]

Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> My goal is to make the kernel smaller and faster, and as far as the 
> placement of 'inline' keywords goes, i dont have too strong feelings about 
> how it's achieved: they have a certain level of documentation value 
> [signalling that a function is _intended_ to be lightweight] but otherwise 
> they are pretty neutral attributes to me.
> 

As far as naming is concerned, gcc effectively supports four levels,
which *currently* map onto macros as follows:

__always_inline		Inline unconditionally
inline			Inlining hint
<nothing>		Standard heuristics
noinline		Uninline unconditionally

A lot of noise is being made about the naming of the levels (and I
personally believe we should have a different annotation for "inline
unconditionally for correctness" and "inline unconditionally for
performance", as a documentation issue), but those are the four we get.

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/