From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Jul 23 08:34:26 2003
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 03F9C37B401; Wed, 23 Jul 2003 08:34:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rod.inty.net (rod.inty.net [195.224.93.241])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 2838143F3F; Wed, 23 Jul 2003 08:34:21 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from paul@freebsd-services.com)
Received: from inty.hq.inty.net (inty-untrusted-aztec-west.inty.net
	[212.50.178.178])
	by rod.inty.net (8.11.6p2/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h6NFYH583520;
	Wed, 23 Jul 2003 16:34:20 +0100 (BST)
Received: from [10.0.1.111] ([10.0.1.111])
	by inty.hq.inty.net (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id h6NFYFdx035928;
	Wed, 23 Jul 2003 16:34:16 +0100 (BST)
From: Paul Richards <paul@freebsd-services.com>
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: <19806.1058938811@critter.freebsd.dk>
References: <19806.1058938811@critter.freebsd.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain
Message-Id: <1058974459.31173.17.camel@localhost>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.3 
Date: 23 Jul 2003 16:34:20 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Sender-IP: 10.0.1.111
X-INT-DeliveryDone: h6NFYFdx035928
cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.ORG
cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern init_main.c kern_malloc.c md5c.c
	vfs_subr.c
X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree <cvs-all.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-all>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-all@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 15:34:26 -0000

On Wed, 2003-07-23 at 06:40, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

> 
> The ones I took out yesterday are the onces which GCC had ignored and
> which therefore ipso facto were "unproven" _and_ added significant
> amounts of object code if respected. 

That's just untrue. The inline you removed from lnc had *ZERO* impact on
code size.

My strong suspicion, based on the tone of the commit message,  is that
you didn't bother to take the time to consider whether the author knew
what they were doing by studying how they'd used inline, you just jumped
in and removed them because you thought you knew best.

While gcc has been broken for a few releases it wasn't always broken.
The inlines in lnc were written about 10 years ago on a 386, when gcc
definitely did this properly and you did your best to optimise the
critical path in an interrupt function.

Paul.