On Feb 9 2007 14:04, Andi Kleen wrote:
>Andrew Morton <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>> As long as nobody takes the address of them (which wouldn't compile today
>> anyway) then the compiler should be able to not allocate store for these.
>
>This would only work for unit-at-a-time compilers (if it works at all,
>i'm not sure), but not older 3.x compilers
>
>> That they're const might help too.
>
>Don't think it does.
GCC 4.1 optimizes both Andrew's and Frederik Deweerdt's ideas
perfectly out. Even if the const was not there in Frederik's example,
gcc seems throw it out with -O2 (judging by `nm` output) since it is
1. static 2. unused. Gcc even gives out a warning that the item is
unused when not marked with const.
Jan
--
ft: http://freshmeat.net/p/chaostables/
-
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]
