diff mbox

x86: bpf_jit_comp: Remove inline from static function definitions

Message ID 1417741284.2721.26.camel@perches.com
State Accepted, archived
Delegated to: David Miller
Headers show

Commit Message

Joe Perches Dec. 5, 2014, 1:01 a.m. UTC 
Let the compiler decide instead.

No change in object size x86-64 -O2 no profiling

Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Suggested-by: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
---
On Thu, 2014-12-04 at 16:46 -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-12-04 at 15:31 -0800, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> 
> > well, it is a trivial function even from compiler point of view.
> > Dropping inline keyword doesn't help. gcc still inlines them.
> > Changing all 3 functions to _noinline_ doesn't help either.
> > So I think this patch is actually quite helpful to reduce code size.
> 
> Well, again this might depend on CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE

-Os has a different size delta, but it's still
smaller using this new function.

> I guess people trying to get very small kernels are using this option.
> 
> My point was : If we care about code size, we should also remove these
> inline keywords at the same time, to increase SNR of netdev/lkml lists.

Because there's no object change here, inline removals
would probably be a good thing for this file.

 arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 18 +++++++++---------
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Comments

Alexei Starovoitov Dec. 5, 2014, 1:21 a.m. UTC | #1 
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> Let the compiler decide instead.
>
> No change in object size x86-64 -O2 no profiling
>
> Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
> Suggested-by: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>

Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>

Dave, this is on top of previous patch:
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/417960/

Joe, please mention dependencies next time.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Joe Perches Dec. 5, 2014, 1:43 a.m. UTC | #2 
On Thu, 2014-12-04 at 17:21 -0800, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> Joe, please mention dependencies next time.

No real need here.
It's in the same thread.



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
David Miller Dec. 9, 2014, 7:57 p.m. UTC | #3 
From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2014 17:01:24 -0800

> Let the compiler decide instead.
> 
> No change in object size x86-64 -O2 no profiling
> 
> Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
> Suggested-by: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>

Applied.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
index 09e2cea..626e013 100644
--- a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
+++ b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@  extern u8 sk_load_byte_positive_offset[];
 extern u8 sk_load_word_negative_offset[], sk_load_half_negative_offset[];
 extern u8 sk_load_byte_negative_offset[];
 
-static inline u8 *emit_code(u8 *ptr, u32 bytes, unsigned int len)
+static u8 *emit_code(u8 *ptr, u32 bytes, unsigned int len)
 {
 	if (len == 1)
 		*ptr = bytes;
@@ -52,12 +52,12 @@  static inline u8 *emit_code(u8 *ptr, u32 bytes, unsigned int len)
 #define EMIT4_off32(b1, b2, b3, b4, off) \
 	do {EMIT4(b1, b2, b3, b4); EMIT(off, 4); } while (0)
 
-static inline bool is_imm8(int value)
+static bool is_imm8(int value)
 {
 	return value <= 127 && value >= -128;
 }
 
-static inline bool is_simm32(s64 value)
+static bool is_simm32(s64 value)
 {
 	return value == (s64) (s32) value;
 }
@@ -94,7 +94,7 @@  static int bpf_size_to_x86_bytes(int bpf_size)
 #define X86_JGE 0x7D
 #define X86_JG  0x7F
 
-static inline void bpf_flush_icache(void *start, void *end)
+static void bpf_flush_icache(void *start, void *end)
 {
 	mm_segment_t old_fs = get_fs();
 
@@ -133,7 +133,7 @@  static const int reg2hex[] = {
  * which need extra byte of encoding.
  * rax,rcx,...,rbp have simpler encoding
  */
-static inline bool is_ereg(u32 reg)
+static bool is_ereg(u32 reg)
 {
 	return (1 << reg) & (BIT(BPF_REG_5) |
 			     BIT(AUX_REG) |
@@ -143,14 +143,14 @@  static inline bool is_ereg(u32 reg)
 }
 
 /* add modifiers if 'reg' maps to x64 registers r8..r15 */
-static inline u8 add_1mod(u8 byte, u32 reg)
+static u8 add_1mod(u8 byte, u32 reg)
 {
 	if (is_ereg(reg))
 		byte |= 1;
 	return byte;
 }
 
-static inline u8 add_2mod(u8 byte, u32 r1, u32 r2)
+static u8 add_2mod(u8 byte, u32 r1, u32 r2)
 {
 	if (is_ereg(r1))
 		byte |= 1;
@@ -160,13 +160,13 @@  static inline u8 add_2mod(u8 byte, u32 r1, u32 r2)
 }
 
 /* encode 'dst_reg' register into x64 opcode 'byte' */
-static inline u8 add_1reg(u8 byte, u32 dst_reg)
+static u8 add_1reg(u8 byte, u32 dst_reg)
 {
 	return byte + reg2hex[dst_reg];
 }
 
 /* encode 'dst_reg' and 'src_reg' registers into x64 opcode 'byte' */
-static inline u8 add_2reg(u8 byte, u32 dst_reg, u32 src_reg)
+static u8 add_2reg(u8 byte, u32 dst_reg, u32 src_reg)
 {
 	return byte + reg2hex[dst_reg] + (reg2hex[src_reg] << 3);
 }