From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263187AbTGXT27 (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jul 2003 15:28:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S268019AbTGXT27 (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jul 2003 15:28:59 -0400 Received: from crosslink-village-512-1.bc.nu ([81.2.110.254]:62202 "EHLO lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263187AbTGXT26 (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jul 2003 15:28:58 -0400 Subject: Re: [uClinux-dev] Kernel 2.6 size increase - get_current()? From: Alan Cox To: Hollis Blanchard Cc: David McCullough , uclinux-dev@uclinux.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Organization: Message-Id: <1059075436.7998.58.camel@dhcp22.swansea.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-5) Date: 24 Jul 2003 20:37:17 +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Iau, 2003-07-24 at 16:30, Hollis Blanchard wrote: > So you're arguing for more inlining, because icache speculative > prefetch will pick up the inlined code? I'm arguing for short inlined fast paths and non inlined unusual paths. > Or you're arguing for less, because code like get_current() which is > called frequently could have a single copy living in icache? Depends how much the jump costs you.