From owner-svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 2 19:03:26 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2841696F; Mon, 2 Jun 2014 19:03:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mho-01-ewr.mailhop.org (mho-03-ewr.mailhop.org [204.13.248.66]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EC1CA290D; Mon, 2 Jun 2014 19:03:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from c-24-8-230-52.hsd1.co.comcast.net ([24.8.230.52] helo=damnhippie.dyndns.org) by mho-01-ewr.mailhop.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1WrXVz-0007OQ-Tp; Mon, 02 Jun 2014 19:03:24 +0000 Received: from [172.22.42.240] (revolution.hippie.lan [172.22.42.240]) by damnhippie.dyndns.org (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id s52J3LSd001479; Mon, 2 Jun 2014 13:03:21 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from ian@FreeBSD.org) X-Mail-Handler: Dyn Standard SMTP by Dyn X-Originating-IP: 24.8.230.52 X-Report-Abuse-To: abuse@dyndns.com (see http://www.dyndns.com/services/sendlabs/outbound_abuse.html for abuse reporting information) X-MHO-User: U2FsdGVkX19DuxAVEfg7vh6lIZf8HVK5 Subject: Re: svn commit: r266974 - in head/sys: dev/dc dev/fxp dev/mii dev/netmap kern net From: Ian Lepore To: Marcel Moolenaar In-Reply-To: References: <201406021754.s52Hsd1B039620@svn.freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2014 13:03:21 -0600 Message-ID: <1401735801.20883.103.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.1 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" , Adrian Chadd , Marcel Moolenaar , "src-committers@freebsd.org" , "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2014 19:03:26 -0000 On Mon, 2014-06-02 at 11:42 -0700, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > On Jun 2, 2014, at 11:27 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote: > > > .. and actually, bikeshedding for a moment, would we be able to move a > > lot of these accessor methods over to inlines? Would that break the > > Juniper way of doing things? > > That would definitely break Juniper as it doesn't give a stable > ABI. > > I've suggested an approach that allows for both, but it was deemed > unnecessary. The argument being that the function call overhead is > negligible. > > We can always revisit that decision if needed... > In my experience, function call overhead is anything but minimal, especially on ARM platforms. -- Ian