Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751258AbaDOGAo (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Apr 2014 02:00:44 -0400 Received: from mail-ee0-f42.google.com ([74.125.83.42]:39468 "EHLO mail-ee0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750790AbaDOGAm (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Apr 2014 02:00:42 -0400 Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 08:00:38 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Josh Triplett Cc: Markus Trippelsdorf , Andi Kleen , Linus Torvalds , Michal Marek , Linux Kbuild mailing list , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Sam Ravnborg Subject: Re: [GIT] kbuild/lto changes for 3.15-rc1 Message-ID: <20140415060038.GA29649@gmail.com> References: <20140407201919.GA15838@sepie.suse.cz> <20140408204906.GA3616@cloud> <20140409013557.GA32556@tassilo.jf.intel.com> <20140409060133.GA6766@gmail.com> <20140409081709.GA283@x4> <20140414103205.GA2846@gmail.com> <20140415010003.GA2765@jtriplet-mobl1> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140415010003.GA2765@jtriplet-mobl1> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Josh Triplett wrote: > > and it slows down kernel development'. > > No, it doesn't slow down development builds; it makes kernel builds > slower if and only if LTO is turned on, which most kernel developers > won't need to do. > > On the other hand, distro and embedded kernels can do so for final > builds, and developers pushing to minimize the kernel can turn it on > for their own work as needed. 1) If LTO will be as fragile for the kernel as it is for user space, then low level developers will be advised to enable it during testing. 2) Developers and testers tend to clone distro configs to get to a working .config: via 'make localconfig' and similar methods. This means that options like this tend to spread into development environments. I saw that with DEBUG_INFO frequently: I detest the option with a passion because it's such a drag on build time (but not as slow as LTO), still time and time again it shows up in a .config of mine. So the "it does not slow down development" argument is simply not true. It clearly has such a cost. LTO might still be a net win in the end, if the upsides are strong enough, but I am wary of arguments that try to ignore or underestimate the weak points. Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/