Re: [PATCH] genirq: ARM dyntick cleanup

[Andrew Morton]

On Mon, 3 Jul 2006 08:41:55 +0100
Russell King <rmk+lkml@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 02, 2006 at 05:35:27PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > This is not exactly a thing of beauty either.  It's much cleaner to use
> > __attribute__((weak)), but that will add an empty call-return to everyone's
> > interrupts.
> 
> Let's not go overboard with the weak stuff - it does not get removed
> at link time, so it remains as dead code in the kernel image.

Well.

void handle_dynamic_tick(struct irqaction *action)
{
}

consumes one byte, doesn't it?  That's not very far overboard ;)

And we can optimise away that byte by doing what we do with cond_syscall().
-
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/