On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 07:04:41PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 07:03:42PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > > And why not mark gen8_canonical_addr() __always_inline?
> >
> > Right, marking those two functions as __always_inline is the other
> > option. The problem is, if you keep doing it, eventually you end up
> > with __always_inline-itis spreading all over the place. And it affects
> > all the other callers, at least in the CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE case.
> > At least this fix is localized.
>
> I'm all for __always_inline in this case, the compiler not inlining sign
> extention is just retarded,
FWIW, in this case it's
salq $8, %rax
sarq $8, %rax
i.e. 8 bytes. Sure, that's 3 bytes longer than call, but really, WTF?
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
