Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 21:07:42 -0400 From: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> To: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> Cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern init_main.c kern_malloc.c md5c.c subr_autoconf.c subr_mbuf.c subr_prf.c tty_subr.c vfs_cluster.c vfs_subr.c Message-ID: <p05210685bb438fb2dcbb@[128.113.24.47]> In-Reply-To: <20030723003212.1606C2A8B2@canning.wemm.org> References: <20030723003212.1606C2A8B2@canning.wemm.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 5:32 PM -0700 7/22/03, Peter Wemm wrote: > >Take the i386 interrupt vector code. Thats an example where >it is massively inlined. Having a non-inlined function that >does all the calculations and bit shifting is much smaller >in code size, but slower at runtime. If I understand this discussion correctly, then the previous version of gcc (in freebsd-current) was NOT inlining these sections event though we thought it was. Might we expect some performance improvements now that we know to force gcc to inline the functions? -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@gilead.netel.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p05210685bb438fb2dcbb>