Re: [Patch 17/23] mask v2 = [6/7] nodemask_t_ia64_changes

Denis Vlasenko
2004-04-09T20:04:36Z

On Friday 09 April 2004 20:53, Paul Jackson wrote:
> > > It may well make sense for the O(1) scheduler to be inlining this.
> >
> > Why?
>
> I was thinking that perhaps this call was in a certain critical
> performance path of the O(1) scheduler.

Even if it is used in some time critical place, adding call overhead
~350 byte function will barely be noticeable on speed, but
*will* be noticeable on size.

> Turned out it wasn't - see further Nick Piggin's followups to this
> same thread.
>
> My latest bitmap/cpumask patch moves this out of line, for ia64.
> The other arch's that use this large find_next_bit() code might
> want to move it out too.

We have far too many large inlines to kill them one by one.
Nedd to automate that.
--
vda