From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [PATCH -v7][RFC]: mutex: implement adaptive spinning Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 07:57:08 +0100 Message-ID: <20090109065708.GA26290@one.firstfloor.org> References: <20090108141808.GC11629@elte.hu> <1231426014.11687.456.camel@twins> <1231434515.14304.27.camel@think.oraclecorp.com> <20090108183306.GA22916@elte.hu> <1231444786.5715.8.camel@brick> <4966ABF9.9080409@zytor.com> <20090109033531.GR496@one.firstfloor.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Andi Kleen , "H. Peter Anvin" , Harvey Harrison , Ingo Molnar , Chris Mason , Peter Zijlstra , Steven Rostedt , paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Gregory Haskins , Matthew Wilcox , Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-fsdevel , linux-btrfs , Thomas Gleixner , Nick Piggin , Peter Morreale , Sven Dietrich To: Linus Torvalds Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-ID: On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 07:42:48PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > I actually often use noinline when developing code simply because it > > makes it easier to read oopses when gcc doesn't inline ever static > > (which it normally does if it only has a single caller) > > Yes. Gcc inlining is a total piece of sh*t. The static inlining by default (unfortunately) saves a lot of text size. For testing I built an x86-64 allyesconfig kernel with -fno-inline-functions-called-once (which disables the default static inlining), and it increased text size by ~4.1% (over 2MB for a allyesconfig kernel). So I think we have to keep that, dropping it would cost too much :/ -Andi -- ak@linux.intel.com