Re: OOPS: 2.6.16-rc6 cpufreq_conservative

[Andrew Morton]

Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>  For me, it made a 4970 byte difference in code size.
>

That's about the same saving as uninlining first_cpu() and next_cpu()
provides.

Anything which iterates across multiple CPUs is cachemiss heaven - I doubt
if this is performance-critical code.  Or at least if it is, we have bigger
problems..

-
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/