Re: [PATCH] v3 RCU: the bloatwatch edition

[David Howells]

Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Your thought is that some of the functions could be moved to tinyrcu.h?
> Indeed, some of them would be smaller if inlined than even the call
> sequence.  For example, rcu_needs_cpu() should remove code from the
> dynticks implementation given that it always returns zero.

tinyrcu.h is probably not a bad idea.  Some of the functions are trivial, and
the code to do a function call is bigger than the body of the function itself.

rcu_exit_nohz(), rcu_nmi_enter/exit(), rcu_batches_completed[_bh](), for
example.  Even call_rcu() and call_rcu_bh() might perhaps benefit from
inlining.

David
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/