Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761369AbbKUBAf (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Nov 2015 20:00:35 -0500 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:64447 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759759AbbKUBAd (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Nov 2015 20:00:33 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,325,1444719600"; d="scan'208";a="856413972" Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 17:00:33 -0800 From: Andi Kleen To: Michal Marek Cc: Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: linux-next: clean up the kbuild tree? Message-ID: <20151121010033.GB8438@tassilo.jf.intel.com> References: <20151115112705.0bf4f0ed@canb.auug.org.au> <20151115175848.GD10150@tassilo.jf.intel.com> <5649D3B9.7020701@suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5649D3B9.7020701@suse.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1446 Lines: 39 Sorry for the delay. On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 02:01:45PM +0100, Michal Marek wrote: > Dne 15.11.2015 v 18:58 Andi Kleen napsal(a): > > On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 11:27:05AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > >> Hi Michal, > >> > >> I notice that the kbuild tree (relative to Linus' tree) only contains > >> lots of merges and these 2 commits from April 2014: > > > > Really should get in that patch officially. I have a variety of users. > > And it clearly has been tested long enough in linux-next :) > > Michal, enough to just repost it? > > So the commit in kbuild.git tree is identical to what is being tested > out of tree? Could you nevertheless provide an updated changelog? One Yes. I'll provide a new ChangeLog. > (and actually only) of Linus' objections was that it was not clear at > all what the actual benefits for the kernel itself are. Do you have some > benchmarks perhaps, where LTO achieves a preformance gain? The main users use it to shrink the kernel. I'll run some new benchmarks. > Also, did the > compile time impact change with gcc 5.x? 5.x is better than 4.x but it's still a slower. It's also not incremential. -Andi -- ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only -- 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/