public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>
Cc: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: unify x86 Makefile(s)
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2007 03:00:51 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200712300300.51427.ak@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071229214522.GG27360@does.not.exist>


> Without inlining the maxmimum stack usage inside foobar() is
> max(stack usage foo(), stack usage bar()). [1]

It's a little more complicated. gcc 4.x (not sure which x, might 0) 
is clever enough to not use max() stack, but only use the stack for the 
different scopes as needed similar as when the calls weren't inlined. 
But gcc 3 didn't do that.

> With foo() and bar() inlined (-funit-at-a-time also enables 
> -finline-functions-called-once), the maxmimum stack usage inside 
> foobar() is sum(stack usage foo(), stack usage bar()). And this
> worst case is the area where gcc 4 is much better than gcc 3.4.

Yes exactly.  If the functions weren't inlined the problem wouldn't
occur because the stack sizes do not add up in the same dynamic call chain. 
Thus a few statetic noinlines will fix it.

-Andi

  reply	other threads:[~2007-12-30  2:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-12-28 21:23 [PATCH] x86: unify x86 Makefile(s) Sam Ravnborg
2007-12-28 22:13 ` Adrian Bunk
2007-12-29  2:14   ` Andi Kleen
2007-12-29  8:07     ` Adrian Bunk
2007-12-29  9:39   ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-12-29  9:52     ` Adrian Bunk
2007-12-29 12:16       ` Andi Kleen
2007-12-29 12:54         ` Adrian Bunk
2007-12-29 18:22           ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-12-29 18:24             ` Andi Kleen
2007-12-29 18:58               ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-12-29 21:17                 ` Andi Kleen
2007-12-29 21:45                   ` Adrian Bunk
2007-12-30  2:00                     ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2007-12-30 11:01                       ` Adrian Bunk
2007-12-29  2:22 ` Andi Kleen
2007-12-29  8:07   ` Sam Ravnborg

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=200712300300.51427.ak@suse.de \
    --to=ak@suse.de \
    --cc=bunk@kernel.org \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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