Recent Features
| |||||||||||||
The Kernel Hacker's Bookshelf: Synthesis: An Efficient Implementation of Fundamental Operating Systems ServicesThe Kernel Hacker's Bookshelf: Synthesis: An Efficient Implementation of Fundamental Operating Systems ServicesPosted Feb 21, 2008 19:10 UTC (Thu) by bronson (subscriber, #4806)In reply to: The Kernel Hacker's Bookshelf: Synthesis: An Efficient Implementation of Fundamental Operating Systems Services by ikm Parent article: KHB: Synthesis: An Efficient Implementation of Fundamental Operating Systems Services
More code does not imply slower. Think bubble sort vs. quicksort. Besides, it sounds like the recompilations only happen at exceptional times. I highly doubt that they result in the sort of cache thrashing that you imply.
(Log in to post comments)
The Kernel Hacker's Bookshelf: Synthesis: An Efficient Implementation of Fundamental Operating Systems Services Posted Feb 21, 2008 19:33 UTC (Thu) by ikm (subscriber, #493) [Link] The bubble sort vs. quicksort would be an incorrect analogy. The idea here is to inject several optimized versions of the same code. My arguing was that one generic version might perform better than a multitude of specialized copies of the same code.
The Kernel Hacker's Bookshelf: Synthesis: An Efficient Implementation of Fundamental Operating Systems Services Posted Feb 22, 2008 10:46 UTC (Fri) by mingo (subscriber, #31122) [Link] Yes. Especially as today's CPUs move towards annotating cache lines and doing certain optimizations of the generic functions by observing their usage and annotating specific instructions. Creating _more_ code goes into the opposite direction.
|
|||||||||||||