From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
Nicolas Pitre <npitre@baylibre.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] compiler_types: Introduce inline_for_performance
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2026 16:01:25 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260118160125.82f645575f8327651be95070@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260118225802.5e658c2a@pumpkin>
On Sun, 18 Jan 2026 22:58:02 +0000 David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com> wrote:
> > mm/ alone has 74 __always_inlines, none are documented, I don't know
> > why they're present, many are probably wrong.
> >
> > Shit, uninlining only __get_user_pages_locked does this:
> >
> > text data bss dec hex filename
> > 115703 14018 64 129785 1faf9 mm/gup.o
> > 103866 13058 64 116988 1c8fc mm/gup.o-after
>
> The next questions are does anything actually run faster (either way),
> and should anything at all be marked 'inline' rather than 'always_inline'.
>
> After all, if you call a function twice (not in a loop) you may
> want a real function in order to avoid I-cache misses.
yup
> But I'm sure there is a lot of code that is 'inline_for_bloat' :-)
ooh, can we please have that?
I do think that every always_inline should be justified and commented,
but I haven't been energetic about asking for that.
A fun little project would be go through each one, figure out whether
were good reasons and if not, just remove them and see if anyone
explains why that was incorrect.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-19 0:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-18 15:24 [PATCH] compiler_types: Introduce inline_for_performance Eric Dumazet
2026-01-18 15:32 ` Florian Westphal
2026-01-18 15:39 ` Eric Dumazet
2026-01-18 18:36 ` kernel test robot
2026-01-18 22:33 ` David Laight
2026-01-18 19:47 ` Andrew Morton
2026-01-18 20:38 ` Eric Dumazet
2026-01-18 22:58 ` David Laight
2026-01-19 0:01 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2026-01-19 9:33 ` David Laight
2026-01-19 10:25 ` Eric Dumazet
2026-01-19 10:33 ` Eric Dumazet
2026-01-19 10:50 ` David Laight
2026-01-19 15:47 ` Nicolas Pitre
2026-01-19 19:03 ` David Laight
2026-01-19 19:44 ` Nicolas Pitre
2026-01-18 21:04 ` kernel test robot
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=20260118160125.82f645575f8327651be95070@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=npitre@baylibre.com \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
/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