RE: Synchronizing Bit operations V2
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: Synchronizing Bit operations V2
- From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 16:58:25 -0800 (PST)
- Cc: David Mosberger-Tang <David.Mosberger@xxxxxxx>, Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Zoltan Menyhart <Zoltan.Menyhart@xxxxxxxx>, "Boehm, Hans" <hans.boehm@xxxxxx>, "Grundler, Grant G" <grant.grundler@xxxxxx>, "Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@xxxxxxxxx>, akpm@xxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-ia64@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <B8E391BBE9FE384DAA4C5C003888BE6F061AAF44@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- References: <B8E391BBE9FE384DAA4C5C003888BE6F061AAF44@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Thu, 30 Mar 2006, Luck, Tony wrote:
> > Also some higher level functions may want to have the mode passed to them
> > as parameters. See f.e. include/linux/buffer_head.h. Without the
> > parameters you will have to maintain farms of definitions for all cases.
>
> But if any part of the call chain from those higher level functions
> down to these low level functions is not inline, then the compiler
> won't be able to collapse out the "switch (mode)" ... so we'd end up
> with a ton of extra object code.
Correct. But such bitops are typically defined to be inline.
-
: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[Index of Archives]
[Linux Kernel]
[Sparc Linux]
[DCCP]
[Linux ARM]
[Yosemite News]
[Linux SCSI]
[Linux x86_64]
[Linux for Ham Radio]
