From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] KVM: add kvm_arch_sched_in Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 15:25:26 +0200 Message-ID: <53F5F346.5090105@redhat.com> References: <1408567997-21222-1-git-send-email-rkrcmar@redhat.com> <1408567997-21222-2-git-send-email-rkrcmar@redhat.com> <53F5ADF6.7060000@redhat.com> <20140821113801.GA20546@potion.brq.redhat.com> <53F5E5B1.6020106@redhat.com> <20140821125056.GE20453@potion.brq.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Gleb Natapov , Raghavendra KT , Vinod Chegu , Hui-Zhi , Christian Borntraeger To: =?UTF-8?B?UmFkaW0gS3LEjW3DocWZ?= Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:13783 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754551AbaHUNZp (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Aug 2014 09:25:45 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20140821125056.GE20453@potion.brq.redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Il 21/08/2014 14:50, Radim Kr=C4=8Dm=C3=A1=C5=99 ha scritto: > > >=20 > > > All empty arch functions are in '.c' files, so it seems better to= follow > > > the same path. > > > (And have one refactoring patch if GCC does not optimize this.) > >=20 > > GCC certainly does not optimize this (unless you use LTO). >=20 > I see LTO patches in next ... do we want to move every empty arch > function into headers? I wouldn't reject the patches. (It would also save some lines of code, since in the headers it's commo= n to do "static inline void foo(void) {}" on a single line). > (It is probably going to take LTO few years to be enabled by default.= ) Indeed... see also http://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/608945/7763ad2aee106f1d/ from today's LWN issue. Paolo