Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from February 2017
Re: more process_optree
Thread Previous
From:
Dave Mitchell
Date:
February 15, 2017 19:31
Subject:
Re: more process_optree
Message ID:
20170215193048.GY8158@iabyn.com
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 11:17:59AM -0700, Jim Cromie wrote:
> yes, its bigger, but its out-of-band, and the resulting optree is ~20%
> smaller,
If you're into reducing op sizes, you'd be better off initially trying
to eliminate the opslot_next and/or opslot_slab fields from the opslot
struct (which is something I have on my list of things to look at).
Be warned that I am extremely unlikely to recommend the committing into
blead of any patch which unionises op_ppaddr and op_sibling.
> > A problem shared is a problem doubled.
>
> that one feels hand-picked, or was it just coincidence ?
It's purely random.
--
If life gives you lemons, you'll probably develop a citric acid allergy.
Thread Previous