From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/5] bonding: simple macro cleanup
Date: Wed, 14 May 2014 16:37:00 -0700
Message-ID: <CAADnVQKvrL+eKNbV=OWP3h2qPmHDm5ixt_4qNDtw-DZeR8US-w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1400072064-26095-1-git-send-email-vfalico@gmail.com>
	<063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6D1724466A@AcuExch.aculab.com>
	<20140514132922.GA24104@mikrodark.usersys.redhat.com>
	<CAADnVQKw3npBoeuQbVf4FtDiqiZuc7+1z7fwUL_6Vru-p3BwDQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<1400084983.19788.15.camel@joe-AO725>
	<CAADnVQ+6-KQRRLS6Nos7u1J1BA9KoS6bJFAsnWE6d4vC010Djg@mail.gmail.com>
	<1400105033.30384.34.camel@joe-AO725>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Cc: Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@gmail.com>,
	David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com>,
	"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Jay Vosburgh <j.vosburgh@gmail.com>,
	Andy Gospodarek <andy@greyhouse.net>,
	Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@redhat.com>
To: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-qg0-f44.google.com ([209.85.192.44]:51985 "EHLO
	mail-qg0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1750926AbaENXhA (ORCPT
	<rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Wed, 14 May 2014 19:37:00 -0400
Received: by mail-qg0-f44.google.com with SMTP id i50so488858qgf.31
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Wed, 14 May 2014 16:37:00 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1400105033.30384.34.camel@joe-AO725>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 3:03 PM, Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-05-14 at 14:52 -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
>> I cannot imagine the case where macro would be faster than static inline
>> unless it wasn't inlined.
>
> For an example, look at commit 4153577a8d
> ("tg3: Use different macros for pci_chip_rev_id accesses")
>
> Converting these macros to static inline produces
> larger/slower code.  (at least with gcc 4.7.3)
>
> +#define tg3_chip_rev_id(tp)                                    \
> +       ((tp)->pci_chip_rev_id)
> +#define tg3_asic_rev(tp)                                       \
> +       ((tp)->pci_chip_rev_id >> 12)
> +#define tg3_chip_rev(tp)                                       \
> +       ((tp)->pci_chip_rev_id >> 8)
>

hmm. interesting.
Using gcc 4.7.2 object file size is larger with 'static inline'
2893016 vs 2868112
but that's due to larger debug info.
.text is actually smaller 000207c4 vs 00020824
and these three calls were inlined (even without __always_inline),
so I suspect it's better optimized..
though better optimized can very well mean slower.