Re: [RFC PATCH] Drop some asm from copy_user_64.S

[Borislav Petkov]

On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 12:31:40PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> So why should an alternatives-CALL, inlined directly into call sites,
> cost more kernel space?

Not the alternatives CALL alone but inlining _copy_*_user with all the
preparation glue around it would. Basically what we're doing currently.

See how uninlining copy_user_generic() dropped text size from 12375798 to
12269658.

But let me do some more staring...

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
--
--
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/