From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8]: uninline & uninline Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2008 14:15:06 +0100 Message-ID: References: <1203515238-22848-1-git-send-email-ilpo.jarvinen@helsinki.fi> <20080223000220.e9229c99.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Ilpo_J=E4rvinen?= , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Miller , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo To: Andrew Morton Return-path: Received: from mx1.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:44820 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751376AbYBWNPI (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Feb 2008 08:15:08 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20080223000220.e9229c99.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (Andrew Morton's message of "Sat\, 23 Feb 2008 00\:02\:20 -0800") Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Andrew Morton writes: >> -41525 2066 f, 3370 +, 44895 -, diff: -41525 IS_ERR > > This is a surprise. I expect that the -mm-only > profile-likely-unlikely-macros.patch is the cause of this and mainline > doesn't have this problem. Shouldn't they only have overhead when the respective CONFIG is enabled? > If true, then this likely/unlikely bloat has probably spread into a lot of > your other results and it all should be redone against mainline, sorry :( > > (I'm not aware of anyone having used profile-likely-unlikely-macros.patch > in quite some time. That's unfortunate because it has turned up some > fairly flagrant code deoptimisations) Is there any reason they couldn't just be merged to mainline? I think it's a useful facility. -Andi