Re: [rfc] the kernel workflow & trivial "global -> static" patches

[Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>]

On Tue, May 06, 2008 at 02:21:31AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> 
> I don't think the code changes actually with current gcc for integer
> code if you change something from global to static (unless it causes
> gcc to inline the function, but then it might be well larger if you're
> unlucky)

It's a common case that a function has only one caller. It should always 
be an (at least tiny) space win to get them inlined.

> The only file size change you'll see will be from a smaller symbol
> table in the vmlinux ELF file, but that is not even loaded at run time
> or included into the bzImage (and the kallsyms table has statics too)
>...

I'm not attaching size change information to these patches since 
whatever change one sees anyway also depends on other factors like
the exact kernel configuration, so it's non-trivial to get numbers
that could be taken seriously.

There are many small aspects, e.g. both gcc with -Wmissing-prototypes 
and sparse give warnings, and the problem might either be needlessly 
global code or the fact that a function prototype is either not in a 
header or the header not #include'd by the file. Although I've only
2 or 3 times catched such bugs in the kernel that is a nasty to debug 
class of bugs and gcc can find such problems at compile time.

> I could see some advantage from static in future compiler versions 
> though from better optimization, but it's quite remote.
>...

The best case I've actually seen in practice was a variable I made 
static, and with CONFIG_DEBUG_FOOBAR=n gcc was now able to prove that 
the value never changed resulting in the variable plus quite a chunk
of code no longer emitted.

> -Andi

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed