From: Gilles Chanteperdrix <gilles.chanteperdrix@xenomai.org>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@domain.hid>
Cc: Xenomai-core@domain.hid
Subject: Re: [Xenomai-core] [PATCH 3/4] Uninline heavy locking functions
Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2008 18:51:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <18368.23813.430770.37223@domain.hid> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47C021F3.20002@domain.hid>
Jan Kiszka wrote:
> At least when SMP is enable, already __xnlock_get becomes far too
> heavy-weighted for being inlined. xnlock_put is fine now, but looking
> closer at the disassembly still revealed a lot of redundancy related to
> acquiring and releasing xnlocks. In fact, we are mostly using
> xnlock_get_irqsave and xnlock_put_irqrestore. Both include fiddling with
> rthal_local_irq_save/restore, also heavy-weighted on SMP.
>
> So this patch turns the latter two into uninlined functions which
> reduces the text size or nucleus and skins significantly on x86-64/SMP
> (XENO_OPT_DEBUG_NUCLEUS disabled):
I think the human idea of how long an inline function can be is far more
restrictive than what a processor can take. When looking at assembly
code, you always find the code long, whereas in reality it is not that
long for a processor.
Besides, IMO, the proper way to uninline xnlock operations is to leave
the non contended case inline, and to move the spinning out of line.
And this is something we should not do without measuring its impact.
--
Gilles Chanteperdrix.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-02-23 17:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-02-23 13:33 [Xenomai-core] [PATCH 0/4] Fixes and improvements around xnlock Jan Kiszka
2008-02-23 13:36 ` [Xenomai-core] [PATCH 2/4] Fix and optimize xnlock_put Jan Kiszka
2008-02-23 17:41 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2008-02-23 18:05 ` Jan Kiszka
2008-02-23 18:29 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2008-02-23 18:57 ` Jan Kiszka
2008-02-23 19:41 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2008-02-23 23:50 ` Philippe Gerum
2008-02-23 13:37 ` [Xenomai-core] [PATCH 1/4] Refactor generic system.h Jan Kiszka
2008-02-23 17:38 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2008-02-23 18:03 ` Jan Kiszka
2008-02-23 18:59 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2008-03-01 18:54 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2008-03-01 19:22 ` Jan Kiszka
2008-02-23 13:38 ` [Xenomai-core] [PATCH 3/4] Uninline heavy locking functions Jan Kiszka
2008-02-23 17:51 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix [this message]
2008-02-23 18:13 ` Jan Kiszka
2008-02-23 18:33 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2008-02-23 18:58 ` Jan Kiszka
2008-02-23 21:36 ` Jeroen Van den Keybus
2008-02-23 13:50 ` [Xenomai-core] [RFC][PATCH 4/4] Recursive FIFO ticket xnlock Jan Kiszka
2008-02-23 17:54 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2008-02-23 18:20 ` Jan Kiszka
2008-02-23 18:43 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2008-02-23 19:13 ` Jan Kiszka
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=18368.23813.430770.37223@domain.hid \
--to=gilles.chanteperdrix@xenomai.org \
--cc=Xenomai-core@domain.hid \
--cc=jan.kiszka@domain.hid \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.