From: Jean Tourrilhes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 10:15:17 -0700
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 07:03:27PM +0200, Michael Buesch wrote:
> >
> > Sure, other people have different opinions on that, but I think
> > with my approach we get smallest code with good speed.
>
> Try with
On Thu, 2007-04-26 at 09:50 -0700, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
> That's clearly not true of all compilers. All gcc versions
> before 4.0 need serious help to inline functions used only once. Our
> current minimal requirement for the kernel is gcc 3.2, therefore this
> code is still useful.
>
On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 07:03:27PM +0200, Michael Buesch wrote:
>
> Sure, other people have different opinions on that, but I think
> with my approach we get smallest code with good speed.
Try with gcc-3.3 if you don't trust me. Your patch will
produce bigger and slower code. Thanks.
On Thursday 26 April 2007 18:50:32 Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 08:07:39PM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > This patch removes a bunch of inline abuse from wext. Most functions
> > that were marked inline are only used once so the compiler will inline
> > them anyway, others are
On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 08:07:39PM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> This patch removes a bunch of inline abuse from wext. Most functions
> that were marked inline are only used once so the compiler will inline
> them anyway, others are used multiple times but there's no requirement
> for them to be in
This patch removes a bunch of inline abuse from wext. Most functions
that were marked inline are only used once so the compiler will inline
them anyway, others are used multiple times but there's no requirement
for them to be inline since they aren't in any fast paths.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg
