Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-next] iavf: remove "inline" functions from iavf_txrx.c

[Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@intel.com>]

From: Ahmed Zaki <ahmed.zaki@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2023 14:08:05 -0600

> 
> On 2023-08-24 09:46, Ahmed Zaki wrote:
>>
>> On 2023-08-24 08:49, Alexander Lobakin wrote:
>>> From: Ahmed Zaki <ahmed.zaki@intel.com>
>>> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2023 06:23:37 -0600
>>>
>>>> From: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>
>>>>
>>>> The iAVF txrx hotpath code has several functions that are marked as
>>>> "static inline" in the iavf_txrx.c file. This use of inline is frowned
>>>> upon in the netdev community and explicitly marked as something to
>>>> avoid
>>>> in the Linux coding-style document (section 15).
>>>>
>>>> Even though these functions are only used once, it is expected that GCC
>>>> is smart enough to decide when to perform function inlining where
>>>> appropriate without the "hint".
>>> The compilers sometimes do unexpected things. I wouldn't blindly hope.
>>> This means, I'd like to have some objdiff or at least bloat-o-meter
>>> output here to prove this commit doesn't hurt.
>>> If there are changes in the object code -- then some perf tests as well.
>>
>> OK, I will add a bloat-o-meter in v2
> 
> bloat-o-meter is showing zero diff:
> 
> add/remove: 0/0 grow/shrink: 0/0 up/down: 0/0 (0)
> Function                                     old     new   delta
> Total: Before=12166, After=12166, chg +0.00%

Ack. Add it to the commit message please. But before that, please check
the same with Clang. And don't forget that we have
CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_PERFORMANCE and CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE and ideally I'd
like you to test both GCC and Clang on both of them, since they pass
different `-Ox` flags and results may sometimes vary a lot (`-Os`
inlines stuff less aggressively).

Thanks,
Olek
_______________________________________________
Intel-wired-lan mailing list
Intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org
https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-wired-lan