On 02/12/2021 09:10, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi,
On 12/1/21 22:39, Steve Wahl wrote:
On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 04:26:39PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
On Tue, 2021-11-30 at 13:34 -0600, Steve Wahl wrote:
On Sat, Nov 27, 2021 at 05:03:20PM +0000, Colin Ian King wrote:
Don't populate the const array dots on the stack
[]
Examination of the disassembly shows that the compiler actually
eliminates the creation of the pointer "dots" on the stack and just
passes the address of the string constant to the printk function.
So this change should not have any actual effect (I don't know where
you got the "shrinks object code" from), and in my humble opinion
makes the code less clear.
Probably shrinks an allmodconfig where the symbols are referenced.
It probably doesn't do anything to a defconfig.
OK, I looked. Under allmodconfig, the new code is one byte smaller.
Defconfig doesn't include CONFIG_X86_UV and this file doesn't get
compiled.
Using defconfig plus CONFIG_X86_UV and prerequisites, the new code is
24 bytes larger, probably because of alignment added.
allmodconfig:
text data bss dec hex filename
30827 18358 1472 50657 c5e1 uv_nmi.o
30828 18358 1472 50658 c5e2 uv_nmi.orig.o
default config + CONFIG_X86_UV:
text data bss dec hex filename
9918 216 160 10294 2836 uv_nmi.o
9894 216 160 10270 281e uv_nmi.orig.o
So I still don't think this patch makes sense.
I agree, so I've dropped this patch from the queue.
Regards,
Hans
+1. Apologies for wasting your valuable time. I appreciate the
detailed review.
Colin
