From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH -v7][RFC]: mutex: implement adaptive spinning Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 17:06:52 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: References: <4966AB74.2090104@zytor.com> <20090109133710.GB31845@elte.hu> <20090109204103.GA17212@elte.hu> <20090109213442.GA20051@elte.hu> <1231537320.5726.2.camel@brick> <20090109231227.GA25070@elte.hu> <20090110010125.GA31031@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Harvey Harrison , "H. Peter Anvin" , Andi Kleen , Chris Mason , Peter Zijlstra , Steven Rostedt , paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Gregory Haskins , Matthew Wilcox , Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-fsdevel , linux-btrfs , Thomas Gleixner , Nick Piggin , Peter Morreale , Sven Dietrich To: Ingo Molnar Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20090110010125.GA31031@elte.hu> List-ID: On Sat, 10 Jan 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > Well, it's not totally meaningless. To begin with, defining 'inline' to > mean 'always inline' is a Linux kernel definition. So we already changed > the behavior - in the hope of getting it right most of the time and in the > hope of thus improving the kernel. Umm. No we didn't. We've never changed it. It was "always inline" back in the old days, and then we had to keep it "always inline", which is why we override the default gcc meaning with the preprocessor. Now, OPTIMIZE_INLINING _tries_ to change the semantics, and people are complaining.. Linus