From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S269140AbTGJJpV (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jul 2003 05:45:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S269143AbTGJJpU (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jul 2003 05:45:20 -0400 Received: from rumms.uni-mannheim.de ([134.155.50.52]:25840 "EHLO rumms.uni-mannheim.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S269140AbTGJJpS (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jul 2003 05:45:18 -0400 From: Thomas Schlichter To: William Lee Irwin III Subject: Re: 2.5.74-mm3 - apm_save_cpus() Macro still bombs out Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 11:59:49 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.9 Cc: Piet Delaney , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org References: <20030708223548.791247f5.akpm@osdl.org> <200307101142.37137.schlicht@uni-mannheim.de> <20030710094841.GU15452@holomorphy.com> In-Reply-To: <20030710094841.GU15452@holomorphy.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200307101159.51175.schlicht@uni-mannheim.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 10 July 2003 11:48, William Lee Irwin III wrote: > On Thursday 10 July 2003 11:27, William Lee Irwin III wrote: > >> Could you try the following? > > On Thu, Jul 10, 2003 at 11:42:35AM +0200, Thomas Schlichter wrote: > > OK, I tried it. For me it compiles! > > But the size of the resulting objectfile's text section is about 64bytes > > larger than with my patch. So it seems that gcc3.3 wasn't able to > > optimize away all the unneeded stuff... > > And I don't think my patch is that ugly, but hey, it's your decision... > > 64B? Why do you care? It's not the 64B... I care about the unneeded but executed code! But I'm a hopeless perfectionist caring about such nits... And I don't know why everybody hates my patches... ;-( Thomas