On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 12:24:41AM +0900, JoonSoo Kim wrote: > > That would be functionally similar to your patch but it will preserve git > > blame, churn less code and be harder to make mistakes with in the unlikely > > event a third call to alloc_pages_direct_compact is ever added. > > Your suggestion looks good. > But, the size of page_alloc.o is more than before. > > I test 3 approaches, vanilla, always_inline and > wrapping(alloc_page_direct_compact which is your suggestion). > In my environment (v3.5-rc5, gcc 4.6.3, x86_64), page_alloc.o shows > below number. > > total, .text section, .text.unlikely > page_alloc_vanilla.o: 93432, 0x510a, 0x243 > page_alloc_inline.o: 93336, 0x52ca, 0xa4 > page_alloc_wrapping.o: 93528, 0x515a, 0x238 > > Andrew said that inlining add only 26 bytes to .text of page_alloc.o, > but in my system, need more bytes. > Currently, I think this patch doesn't have obvious benefit, so I want > to drop it. > Any objections? > No objections to dropping the patch. It was at worth looking at so thanks for that. -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>