Re: [PATCH] mthca: initialize send and receive queue locks separately

Quoting r. Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>:
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] mthca: initialize send and receive queue locks separately
> 
> 
> * Michael S. Tsirkin <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > > Has no effect on non-lockdep kernels.
> > 
> > Hmm ... adding parameters to function still has text cost, I think. No?
> 
> it shouldnt - it's a static function and the parameter is unused _and_ 
> is of a type that is zero-size [on non-lockdep kernels] - gcc ought to 
> be able to optimize it out.

Ingo, you are right, and I just checked this with several gcc versions.
More power to you :)

-- 
MST
-
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/

---

• References:
  • Re: [PATCH] mthca: initialize send and receive queue locks separately
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: R/W semaphore changes
• Next by Date: Re: R/W semaphore changes
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] mthca: initialize send and receive queue locks separately
• Next by thread: [PATCH] lockdep: don't pull in includes when lockdep disabled
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]