Re: Inflation of vmlinux by linker on x86_64

[Joris van Rantwijk]

On 26 sep 2008, at 20:52, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Instead of adding a comment like this, we should simply rename it 
> memmove().

Yes. I tried, but it clashed with an existing memmove declaration in 
asm-x86/string_32.h.

What is the accepted solution for this?
Redefining memmove should be allowed, but then it could no longer be a 
static function.
Using the memmove implementation from the main kernel would be painful 
and ugly.
We could also define "__memmove()" plus "#define memmove __memmove", 
which would also be ugly.

> Furthermore, we probably spend enough time copying that using a real 
> memmove() implementation, using string instructions, would be good.

Are string instructions that much faster?
We can also get some speedup by copying ints instead of chars.

Joris.

--
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/