From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 16:37:40 -0700 > On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 4:14 PM, David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> I suppose then I'd need to make BE's has_zero() a macro instead of a >> function. Either that or we pass a pointer to this opaque typedef >> thing. > > Gcc is *usually* pretty good about optimizing small structures on the > stack, even if you pass a pointer (if the pointer then always gets > dereferenced within that function). So I think you could try the > "pointer to opaque thing" approach and see. > > But yeah, the macro approach obviously puts much less reliance on the > optimizer getting things right, so it might be the way to go if it > turns out that gcc screws up code generation. I'm playing around with this now, I should have something for you to look at in the next few hours. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
