On Wed, 6 Oct 2010, Daniel Walker wrote: > On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 11:30 -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > Is there some way to force GCC to do what I want (interleave the > > functions)? It seems happy to inline them and then optimize the > > register > > usage and instruction ordering. Perhaps that is OK though and we're > > wasting our time trying to be conservative in code size. You could use the noinline qualifier from <linux/compiler.h> with those functions you don't want inlined. > Is it possible to do all this in assembly ? Can't you have the default > implementation using this assembly with different function names, then > just set the assembly function names in C code someplace? That weould be my preference too. Being in assembly means that this code is unlikely to change with different optimization levels and/or gcc versions which would otherwise require different calibration values. Relying on stable calibration is necessary for the lpj kernel cmdline parameter to have some meaning. Nicolas -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
