From: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>
To: "J.A. Magallón" <jamagallon@ono.com>
Cc: "Linux-Kernel, " <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Inlining can be _very_bad...
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 00:28:32 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070329222832.GE14134@stusta.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070330000111.620aaaab@werewolf-wl>
On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 12:01:11AM +0200, J.A. Magallón wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 19:52:54 +0200, Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 01:18:38AM +0200, J.A. Magallón wrote:
> > > Hi all...
> > >
> > > I post this here as it can be of direct interest for kernel development
> > > (as I recall many discussions about inlining yes or no...).
> > >
> > > Testing other problems, I finally got this this issue: the same short
> > > and stupid loop lasted from 3 to 5 times more if it was in main() than
> > > if it was in an out-of-line function. The same (bad thing) happens if
> > > the function is inlined.
> > >...
> > > It looks like is updating the stack on each iteration...This is -march=opteron
> > > code, the -march=pentium4 is similar. Same behaviour with gcc3 and gcc4.
> > >
> > > tst.c and Makefile attached.
> > >
> > > Nice, isn't it ? Please, probe where is my fault...
> >
> > The only fault is to post this issue here instead of the gcc Bugzilla.
>
> Sorry, my intention was just something like 'take a look at your
> reduction-like code, perhaps its sloooow', something like checksum
> funtions in tcp or raid that are inlined expecting to be faster
> and in fact they are slower...
Unless a function that has more than 1 caller is very tiny or reduces at
compile time to a very tiny rest, it's not expected that inlining was
faster on current CPUs.
But most times that's already only up to the compiler - e.g. current gcc
versions already automatically inline all static functions with only
1 caller.
> > In your example the compiler should produce code not slower than with
> > the out-of-line version when inlining. If it doesn't the bug in the
> > compiler resulting in this should be fixed.
>
> That's what I expected, but...
> Going to gcc bugzilla...
Thanks.
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-03-29 22:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-03-28 23:18 Inlining can be _very_bad J.A. Magallón
2007-03-29 1:29 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2007-03-29 17:52 ` Adrian Bunk
2007-03-29 22:01 ` J.A. Magallón
2007-03-29 22:28 ` Adrian Bunk [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20070329222832.GE14134@stusta.de \
--to=bunk@stusta.de \
--cc=jamagallon@ono.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox