Re: pid namespace .text overhead

[Cedric Le Goater <clg-NmTC/0ZBporQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>]

sukadev-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org wrote:
> Cedric Le Goater [clg-NmTC/0ZBporQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org] wrote:
> | FYI,
> | 
> | I just did a compile test on a 2.6.23-rc4-mm1 kernel with and without 
> | the following patches on a x86_64 defconfig  (I also had to remove 
> | CONFIG_IPV6 for some compile reason) :
> 
> Thats a good point.
> 
> We have been a bit liberal with "inline" given that lot of the code was
> going to affect the "fast-path" clone().

are are some figures : 

      with             without

   text    data |   text    data | filename
   1186       4 |   1099       4 | kernel/capability.o
  10390       0 |   9941       0 | kernel/exit.o
  10611     140 |  10434     140 | kernel/fork.o
  10765      72 |  10518      72 | kernel/futex.o
    957      56 |    939      56 | kernel/nsproxy.o
   3446    2292 |   2350    2228 | kernel/pid.o
  13930      45 |  13641      45 | kernel/signal.o
  10177     544 |   9819     544 | kernel/sys.o
   5083      56 |   4809      56 | fs/proc/array.o
  17097     184 |  16748     184 | fs/proc/base.o
  51471    1532 |  50474    1532 | fs/proc/proc.o


> Should we shoot for a time/space trade-off or can we make some inlines
> conditional (i.e inline when not configured for say embedded linux) ?

I'm sure the embedded guys will appreciate :)

Thanks !

C.