Re: [PATCH] syscall latency improvement #1

[Andrew Morton]

Denis Vlasenko wrote:
> 
> > <thinks of another>
> >
> >       s/inline//g
> 
> I like this.

Well, it's a fairly small optimisation, but it's easy.

I did a patch a while back:  http://www.zip.com.au/~akpm/linux/2.4/2.4.17-pre1/inline.patch
This is purely against core kernel files:

 drivers/block/ll_rw_blk.c |   18 ++-------------
 fs/binfmt_elf.c           |    4 +--
 fs/block_dev.c            |    2 -
 fs/dcache.c               |    8 +++---
 fs/inode.c                |    6 ++---
 fs/locks.c                |    8 +++---
 fs/namei.c                |   14 ++++++------
 fs/namespace.c            |   42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 fs/open.c                 |    4 +--
 fs/read_write.c           |    2 -
 fs/stat.c                 |    2 -
 fs/super.c                |    2 -
 include/linux/fs_struct.h |   53 +++-------------------------------------------
 kernel/exit.c             |   10 ++++----
 kernel/fork.c             |    4 +--
 kernel/module.c           |    2 -
 kernel/sched.c            |    6 ++---
 kernel/signal.c           |    3 --
 kernel/sys.c              |    2 -
 kernel/timer.c            |    2 -
 lib/rwsem.c               |    4 +--
 mm/filemap.c              |    4 +--
 mm/highmem.c              |    2 -
 mm/memory.c               |    2 -
 mm/mmap.c                 |    4 +--
 mm/slab.c                 |   14 ++++++------

And it reduces the kernel image by 11 kbytes.  That's not much
RAM, but it's a lot of cache.  It's almost all hot-path stuff.

> ...
> * replace those with big_inline
> * #define it to 'inline' or to '' (nothing) and compare kernel sizes
> * make it CONFIG_xxx option if it worth the trouble

The first patch should be against Documentation/CodingStyle.
What are we trying to achieve here?  What are the guidelines
for when-to and when-to-not?  I'd say:

- If a function has a single call site and is static then it
  is always correct to inline.

- If a function is very small (20-30 bytes) then inlining
  is correct even if it has many call sites.

- If a function is less-small, and has only one or two
  *commonly called* call sites, then inlining is OK.

- If a function is a leaf function, then it is more inlinable
  than a function which makes another function call.

fs/inode.c:__sync_one() violates all the above quite
outrageously :)

-