From: Martin Schwidefsky <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 10:21:20 +0100
> On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 21:57 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > -finline-limit might have been required for older compilers, but
> > nowadays it does no longer make sense.
>
> I didn't check the effects of reverting to the default inline-limit, did
> you find any negative impacts? I'm thinking about the critical code
> paths e.g. minor faults. There better should not be an additional
> function call that would have been inlined with the bigger inline limit,
> since function calls are quite expensive on s390.
You need to be careful now that -Os is specified by default
in 2.6.x
The inline-limit GCC option is interpreted differently in
gcc-4.x when -Os is given vs. when it is not.
On Sparc this caused schedule() to be inlined (I'm not kidding)
which caused all kinds of troubles.
I highly recommed you don't specify it and let the compiler
make the decisions, and add inline tags to places where you
think it is hyper-important for inlining to occur.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
