From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, Mathias Krause <minipli@googlemail.com>,
Mason <slash.tmp@free.fr>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: String literals in __init functions
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 15:15:57 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150326151557.61dfad84272aff10aaa4eba7@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1427407120.15849.34.camel@perches.com>
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:58:40 -0700 Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> > I'd have thought that a function-wide
> > __attribute__((__string_section__(foo))
> > wouldn't be a ton of work to implement.
>
> Maybe not.
>
> Could some future version of gcc move string constants
> in a function to a specific section marked in a manner
> similar to what Andrew described above?
One thing which might complexicate this is
void foo()
{
p("bar");
}
void __attribute__((__string_section__(.init.rodata)) zot()
{
p("bar");
}
It would be silly to create two instances of "bar".
Change it thusly:
#define __mark_str(str) \
({ static const char var[] __attribute__((__section__(".init.string"))) = str; var; })
void foo()
{
p("bar");
}
void zot()
{
p(__mark_str("bar"));
}
and we indeed get two copies of "bar".
It would be nice not to do that, but I guess that losing this
optimization is a reasonable compromise.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-03-26 22:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-03-25 17:56 Mason
2015-03-25 18:01 ` Joe Perches
2015-03-26 12:40 ` Mason
2015-03-26 16:13 ` Joe Perches
2015-03-26 16:37 ` Mathias Krause
2015-03-26 17:53 ` Joe Perches
2015-03-26 20:49 ` Mathias Krause
2015-03-26 21:40 ` Andrew Morton
2015-03-26 21:58 ` Joe Perches
2015-03-26 22:15 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2015-03-27 7:16 ` Mathias Krause
2015-04-02 16:00 ` Joseph Myers
2015-04-02 16:23 ` Joe Perches
2015-03-27 7:05 ` Mathias Krause
2015-03-27 7:32 ` Joe Perches
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150326151557.61dfad84272aff10aaa4eba7@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=minipli@googlemail.com \
--cc=slash.tmp@free.fr \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome