From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 09:47:21 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Subject: Re: [Cbe-oss-dev] [RFC, PATCH 1/4] Add support to OProfile for profiling Cell BE SPUs -- update Message-ID: <20070131084721.GC5596@lst.de> References: <45BE4ED0.5030808@us.ibm.com> <45BE4F2A.5040702@us.ibm.com> <20070130103924.GA14571@lst.de> <1170197398.5235.12.camel@dyn9047021078.beaverton.ibm.com> <1170197846.26655.342.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1170197846.26655.342.camel@localhost.localdomain> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cbe-oss-dev@ozlabs.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, oprofile-list@lists.sourceforge.net, Carl Love List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 09:57:26AM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Tue, 2007-01-30 at 14:49 -0800, Carl Love wrote: > > Christoph: > > > > In our earlier work on the PPU profiling patch, Benjamin Herrenschmidt > > said that we should remove macros that are only used once and just put > > the actual code in. That is why the macros were removed. > > Heh... there is a balance to be found... In some cases, inline functions > might be better too. Well, unless there's a very good reasons against it (token pasting, header pollution) inlines are always preferable over macros, but I didn't want to bring that issue up aswell..