Re: [patch] measurements, numbers about CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING=y impact

H. Peter Anvin
2009-01-09T16:39:18Z

Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> My goal is to make the kernel smaller and faster, and as far as the
> placement of 'inline' keywords goes, i dont have too strong feelings about
> how it's achieved: they have a certain level of documentation value
> [signalling that a function is _intended_ to be lightweight] but otherwise
> they are pretty neutral attributes to me.
>

As far as naming is concerned, gcc effectively supports four levels,
which *currently* map onto macros as follows:

__always_inline Inline unconditionally
inline Inlining hint
<nothing> Standard heuristics
noinline Uninline unconditionally

A lot of noise is being made about the naming of the levels (and I
personally believe we should have a different annotation for "inline
unconditionally for correctness" and "inline unconditionally for
performance", as a documentation issue), but those are the four we get.

-hpa

--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.