Re: 2.6.7-rc3-mm1

Paul Jackson
2004-06-11T04:37:24Z

Andrew,

Do you recall why your i386-uninline-bitops.patch moves i386
find_next_bit() and find_next_zero_bit() out of line, but not
find_first_zero_bit() nor find_first_bit()?

Text sizes - i386 optimized routine (decimal):
find_next_zero_bit 132
find_next_bit 114
find_first_zero_bit 76
find_first_bit 50

Uninlining find_first_bit() reduces my i386 kernel text size by 1336 bytes.

Uninlining find_first_zero_bit() is good for another 208 bytes.

Eh - perhaps this is too small potatoes to worry about now.

Or perhaps there was good reason to leave them inline all along.

Perhaps someone else has further insight to the tradeoffs here, such as
a 'recommended size', above which most routines should be not inlined,
except in special cases.

--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.650.933.1373