Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 22 Jul 2003 12:47:15 +0200
From:      "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
To:        Paul Richards <paul@freebsd-services.com>
Cc:        cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/lnc if_lnc.c 
Message-ID:  <10036.1058870835@critter.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 22 Jul 2003 11:45:24 BST." <20030722104524.GA80471@survey.codeburst.net> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20030722104524.GA80471@survey.codeburst.net>, Paul Richards writes:
>On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 02:22:00AM -0700, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>> phk         2003/07/22 02:22:00 PDT
>> 
>>   FreeBSD src repository
>> 
>>   Modified files:
>>     sys/dev/lnc          if_lnc.c 
>>   Log:
>>   Don't inline ridiculously very large functions.
>>   
>>   Compared to the contents of these functions, an extra function call
>>   is nano-peanuts.
>
>Both of those functions were called from just one place, inside the
>interrupt handler. Is there any reason to not inline them?

Yes, we need to get -Werror on the kernel again, and GCC whines about
ridiculously large functions.

Inline should not be used unless it has a measurable impact on
performance.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?10036.1058870835>