On Thu, 2006-07-06 at 20:45 -0400, Jeff Dike wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 01, 2006 at 08:38:20AM +0800, Miao Qingjun wrote:
> > 082c90c8 <stub_segv_handler>:
> ...
> >  82c9102:       e8 93 ae db ff          call   8083f9a <stub_syscall0>
> ...
> >  82c9120:       e8 57 ae db ff          call   8083f7c <stub_syscall2>
> 
> I guess we should consider a no-O2 compilation to be a case of "it
> hurts, so don't do it".  
> 
> What happened here is that two functions which absolutely have to be
> inlined (because this code is mapped into UML processes with no other
> UML code, so it must be self-contained) weren't.
> 
> It should be possible to detect O2 or greater optimization and fail
> the build if it's not there.  But that assumes that we know that
> non-O2 won't inline stuff, which may not always be true.  Hmmmm

Isn't this what CONFIG_FORCE_INLINING is supposed to do?  Granted, it
appears to only work for gcc4, but...

Daniel