Re: Inline local_bh_disable when TRACE_IRQFLAGS

[Ingo Molnar]

* Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi Ingo:
> 
> I noticed that local_bh_disable is now always out-of-line.  The change 
> was made when TRACE_IRQFLAGS was added.  However, with TRACE_IRQFLAGS 
> off, local_bh_disable does exactly the same work as before.  In 
> particular, it does pretty much the same as what preempt_disable does 
> and the latter is always inline.
> 
> So I'm wondering if it would be reasonable to make it out-of-line when 
> TRACE_IRQFLAGS is off.  This may make a difference because the 
> networking stack is a frequent user of local_bh_disable and 
> local_bh_enable.

do you mean to make it inline again?

(btw., generally i think local_bh_disable() is a poor API because it is 
opaque about the data structure dependency that it governs. Explicit 
exclusion rules generally work better.)

	Ingo
--
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/