Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
quoted text
> 
> I am not saying that the standard marker will have to inhibit
> optimizations. Actually, it's the contrary : a well-thought marker
> should _not_ modify that kind of optimization, and we should put markers
> in code locations less likely to inhibit gcc optimizations. However, in
> the case where we happen to be interested in information otherwise
> optimized away by GCC, it makes sense to inhibit this optimization in
> order to have the information available for tracing.
> 
> I expect this to happen rarely, but I think we must deal with
> optimizations to make sure we never trace garbage due to some unexpected
> gcc optimization. I think it's a small (e.g. undetectable at the
> macrobenchmark level) price to pay to get correct tracing information.
> 

That's a pretty flippant reply... liveness causes register pressure 
which can cause rapid degradation in code quality on a register-starved 
architecture like x86.

	-hpa
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/