Re: [PATCH] x86/platform/uv: make const pointer dots a static const array

[Colin King (gmail)]

On 02/12/2021 09:10, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 12/1/21 22:39, Steve Wahl wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 04:26:39PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2021-11-30 at 13:34 -0600, Steve Wahl wrote:
> > > > On Sat, Nov 27, 2021 at 05:03:20PM +0000, Colin Ian King wrote:
> > > > > Don't populate the const array dots on the stack
> > > []
> > > > Examination of the disassembly shows that the compiler actually
> > > > eliminates the creation of the pointer "dots" on the stack and just
> > > > passes the address of the string constant to the printk function.
> > > >
> > > > So this change should not have any actual effect (I don't know where
> > > > you got the "shrinks object code" from), and in my humble opinion
> > > > makes the code less clear.
> > >
> > > Probably shrinks an allmodconfig where the symbols are referenced.
> > > It probably doesn't do anything to a defconfig.
> >
> > OK, I looked. Under allmodconfig, the new code is one byte smaller.
> >
> > Defconfig doesn't include CONFIG_X86_UV and this file doesn't get
> > compiled.
> >
> > Using defconfig plus CONFIG_X86_UV and prerequisites, the new code is
> > 24 bytes larger, probably because of alignment added.
> >
> > allmodconfig:
> >
> >     text	   data	    bss	    dec	    hex	filename
> >    30827	  18358	   1472	  50657	   c5e1	uv_nmi.o
> >    30828	  18358	   1472	  50658	   c5e2	uv_nmi.orig.o
> >
> > default config + CONFIG_X86_UV:
> >
> >     text	   data	    bss	    dec	    hex	filename
> >     9918	    216	    160	  10294	   2836	uv_nmi.o
> >     9894	    216	    160	  10270	   281e	uv_nmi.orig.o
> >
> > So I still don't think this patch makes sense.
>
> I agree, so I've dropped this patch from the queue.
>
> Regards,
>
> Hans

+1.   Apologies for wasting your valuable time. I appreciate the 
detailed review.

Colin