Re: re-inline sched functions

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Chen, Kenneth W <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com> wrote:

> Ingo Molnar wrote on Friday, March 11, 2005 1:32 AM
> > > -static unsigned int task_timeslice(task_t *p)
> > > +static inline unsigned int task_timeslice(task_t *p)
> >
> > the patch looks good except this one - could you try to undo it and
> > re-measure? task_timeslice() is not used in any true fastpath, if it
> > makes any difference then the performance difference must be some other
> > artifact.
> 
> Chen, Kenneth W wrote on Friday, March 11, 2005 10:40 AM
> > OK, I'll re-measure. Yeah, I agree that this function is not in the fastpath.
> 
> Ingo is right, re-measured on our benchmark setup and did not see any 
> difference whether task_timeslice is inlined or not.  So if people 
> want to take inline keyword out for that function, we won't complain 
> :-)

Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>

uninline task_timeslice() - reduces code footprint noticeably, and it's 
slowpath code.

--- kernel/sched.c.orig
+++ kernel/sched.c
@@ -166,7 +166,7 @@
 #define SCALE_PRIO(x, prio) \
 	max(x * (MAX_PRIO - prio) / (MAX_USER_PRIO/2), MIN_TIMESLICE)
 
-static inline unsigned int task_timeslice(task_t *p)
+static unsigned int task_timeslice(task_t *p)
 {
 	if (p->static_prio < NICE_TO_PRIO(0))
 		return SCALE_PRIO(DEF_TIMESLICE*4, p->static_prio);