Re: [PATCH 03/13] jump label v9: x86 support

From: Andi Kleen
Date: Fri Jun 11 2010 - 04:30:39 EST

> What you are arguing for is a 'bloaty code generator by default' model and
> that model sucks.

I am arguing for a "non sucky code by default" model.

It is widely known that "sucky code by default" sucks already,
that is why the big distros made their choice.

Anyways luckily the default is all config options so we don't need
to agree on this (and the best choice likely varies by workload

> Possibly, but not without substantiating the rather vague statements you have
> made so far.

Yes, more data with recent builds is needed for concrete changes.

BTW afaik the "icache over everything" model was never really
substantiated by all that much data either, just somehow
it became dogma.

I must say I was a bit burned by doing annotations -- i added
unlikely() originally and as far as I can see most unlikely()s
are quite useless today because they do nothing the compiler
doesn't do already so I would prefer to not repeat that.

So my personal preference is actually less annotations over more.


ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Speaking for myself only.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at