From: "J.A. Magallón" <jamagallon@ono.com>
To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>
Cc: "Linux-Kernel, " <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Inlining can be _very_bad...
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 00:01:11 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070330000111.620aaaab@werewolf-wl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070329175254.GC14134@stusta.de>
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...
> 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...
--
J.A. Magallon <jamagallon()ono!com> \ Software is like sex:
\ It's better when it's free
Mandriva Linux release 2007.1 (Cooker) for i586
Linux 2.6.20-jam06 (gcc 4.1.2 20070302 (prerelease) (4.1.2-1mdv2007.1)) #2 SMP PREEMPT
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-03-29 22:04 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 [this message]
2007-03-29 22:28 ` Adrian Bunk
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=20070330000111.620aaaab@werewolf-wl \
--to=jamagallon@ono.com \
--cc=bunk@stusta.de \
--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