Re: [uClinux-dev] Kernel 2.6 size increase - get_current()?

• Next message: Tupshin Harper: "Re: Reiser4 status: benchmarked vs. V3 (and ext3)"
• Previous message: Larry McVoy: "Re: Reiser4 status: benchmarked vs. V3 (and ext3)"
• In reply to: Alan Cox: "Re: [uClinux-dev] Kernel 2.6 size increase - get_current()?"
• Next in thread: Alan Cox: "Re: [uClinux-dev] Kernel 2.6 size increase - get_current()?"
• Reply: Alan Cox: "Re: [uClinux-dev] Kernel 2.6 size increase - get_current()?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Thursday, Jul 24, 2003, at 06:28 US/Central, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> Code size for critical paths is getting more and more performance
> critical
> on x86 as well as on the embedded CPU systems. 3Ghz superscalar
> processors
> lose a lot of clocks to a memory stall.

So you're arguing for more inlining, because icache speculative
prefetch will pick up the inlined code?

Or you're arguing for less, because code like get_current() which is
called frequently could have a single copy living in icache?

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

• Next message: Tupshin Harper: "Re: Reiser4 status: benchmarked vs. V3 (and ext3)"
• Previous message: Larry McVoy: "Re: Reiser4 status: benchmarked vs. V3 (and ext3)"
• In reply to: Alan Cox: "Re: [uClinux-dev] Kernel 2.6 size increase - get_current()?"
• Next in thread: Alan Cox: "Re: [uClinux-dev] Kernel 2.6 size increase - get_current()?"
• Reply: Alan Cox: "Re: [uClinux-dev] Kernel 2.6 size increase - get_current()?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 31 2003 - 22:00:23 EST