On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 11:29:34AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:Eliminating prototypes saves me from an extra go round of the edit-compile testcycle when I change the signature of a function. It probably doesn't matter to you, but it adds a small amount of annoyance to my day. I tried to place functions close together that seemed like they were called together and called from each other. It's hard to know, of course, because GCC will make its own decisions about inlining, for example. At the end of the day, this is an NP problem. I remmber Nat writing grope and using simulated annealing to solve the problem. We don't, but the new layout is more likely to be good than bad, given how I did the rearrangement (delete prototypes, try to compile. Move called function to before its first caller. Repeat). Plus, with all the other changes I'm making, there's a serious reduction in driver size. I haven't compared i-cache sizes specifically, but I'm mostly removing code, so it should be better. -- Intel are signing my paycheques ... these opinions are still mine "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step." -
| Davide Libenzi | [patch 7/8] fdmap v2 - implement sys_socket2 |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 018/196] coda: convert struct class_device to struct device |
| Bart Van Assche | Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel |
| David Newall | Re: Slow DOWN, please!!! |
git: | |
| Christoph Lameter | Network latency regressions from 2.6.22 to 2.6.29 |
| David Miller | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Arjan van de Ven | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
