On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 04:30:19PM +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Sep 2006, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 03:30:12AM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> > > Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > >But no out of line section. So overall it's smaller, although the cache
> > > >footprint
> > > >is 2 bytes larger. But then is 2 bytes larger really an issue? We don't
> > > >have
> > > >_that_ many BUGs anyways.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I think the out of line section is a feature; no point in crufting up
> > > the icache with BUG gunk, especially since a number of them are on
> > > fairly hot paths.
> >
> > It's 10 bytes per BUG.
>
> Or 9 bytes per BUG: I protested about the disassembly problem back
> when the minimized BUG() first went in, and have been using "ljmp"
> in my i386 builds ever since:
Good point.
Need to check if that works on x86-64 too.
-Andi
-
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]
