From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: [patch] measurements, numbers about CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING=y impact Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 10:28:01 -0700 Message-ID: <20090109172801.GC6936@parisc-linux.org> References: <20090108183306.GA22916@elte.hu> <496648C7.5050700@zytor.com> <20090109130057.GA31845@elte.hu> <49675920.4050205@hp.com> <20090109153508.GA4671@elte.hu> <49677CB1.3030701@zytor.com> <20090109084620.3c711aad@infradead.org> <20090109172011.GD26290@one.firstfloor.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Dirk Hohndel , "H. Peter Anvin" , Ingo Molnar , jim owens , Linus Torvalds , Chris Mason , Peter Zijlstra , Steven Rostedt , paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Gregory Haskins , Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-fsdevel , linux-btrfs , Thomas Gleixner , Nick Piggin , Peter Morreale , Sven Dietrich , jh@suse.cz To: Andi Kleen Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20090109172011.GD26290@one.firstfloor.org> List-ID: On Fri, Jan 09, 2009 at 06:20:11PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > Also cc Honza in case he has comments (you might want > to review more of the thread in the archives) I think this particular bug is already known and discussed: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2008-12/msg00365.html and it hints at being fixed with gcc 4.4. Does anyone want to test that? -- Matthew Wilcox Intel Open Source Technology Centre "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step."