* Roman Zippel <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2006, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> > > A const for arguments which are passed by value is completely ignored by
> > > gcc. It has only an effect on local variables and even here gcc doesn't
> > > need it either to produce better code.
> >
> > NACK - gcc3 produces smaller code with the const - only gcc4 fixed that
>
> That would would be a compiler problem, these const _are_ bogus.
code size is really important for the ktime ops, so i'd keep the consts
for the time being. In any case, it's definitely not a 2.6.16 change.
> [...] and this patch doesn't break anything either.
your patch makes code larger on gcc3. Please investigate why.
Ingo
-
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]
