Re: [PATCH v2] x86: page: get_order() optimization

[Maksym Planeta]

On Mon, 28/03/2011 at 07:08 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Have you looked at the disassembly, why does the size increase? I'd expect such 
> a straight assembly optimization to result in smaller code: in the non-constant 
> case it should be the same size as before, in the constant case it should be 
> smaller, because BSR should be smaller than an open-coded search loop, right?


Here is disassembly of patched get_order() with "inline" from
"kernel/kexec.c":

     a6c:       48 8b 5d c8             mov    -0x38(%rbp),%rbx
     a70:       e8 0b fd ff ff          callq  780 <get_order.clone.7>

0000000000000780 <get_order.clone.7>:
     780:       55                      push   %rbp
     781:       b8 01 00 00 00          mov    $0x1,%eax
     786:       48 89 e5                mov    %rsp,%rbp
     789:       c9                      leaveq 
     78a:       c3                      retq   

My version of gcc is gcc (Debian 4.5.2-4) 4.5.2, probably I should
upgrade my gcc version for better inline expansions.

-- 
Thanks,

Maksym Planeta

--
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/