On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Oleg Nesterov <o...@redhat.com> wrote: > Add the new struct rcu_sync_ops which holds sync/call methods, and > turn the function pointers in rcu_sync_struct into the single pointer > to struct rcu_sync_ops. > > +struct rcu_sync_ops { > + void (*sync)(void); > + void (*call)(struct rcu_head *, void (*)(struct rcu_head *)); > +}; > + > struct rcu_sync_struct { > int gp_state; > int gp_count; > @@ -12,43 +17,9 @@ struct rcu_sync_struct { > int cb_state; > struct rcu_head cb_head; > > - void (*sync)(void); > - void (*call)(struct rcu_head *, void (*)(struct rcu_head *)); > + struct rcu_sync_ops *ops;
Ugh. This interface pretty much guarantees that a compiler can never do anything clever, like know that "hey, you used a static initializer on this thing, and the fields are const, so now know statically what the functions are, and I can just turn the indirect jumps into direct jumps". I'm not sure gcc is actually that clever, but by making it this kind of ops pointer, I *guarantee* that gcc can never do it. How about you make the rule be: - get rid of the stupid "type" enum index thing - get rid of the "init" thing that sets pointers in the dynamic data structures. Get rid of the pointer too. - instead, use a "static const" type descriptor for each type (it approaches being your "rcu_sync_ops" structure). Pass this in as an argument to all the functions (use a #define per type or something, so that users don't need to do this by hand) - now every single user passes in that type descriptor. - together with using a few inline functions, suddenly the "indirect" jumps through this type descriptor end up actually being nice direct compile-time constants: iow, they get turned into direct jumps. Tadaa. You actually get good code generation, and you use *less* dynamic memory since you don't have to have this pointer to the descriptor. Linus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/