Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 15:32:09 +0000
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
To: Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.com>
Cc: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
        Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>,
        linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, Nicolas Pitre <nico@fluxnic.net>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=E5ns_Rullg=E5rd?= <mans@mansr.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] scripts: Add a recorduidiv program
Message-ID: <20151130153208.GR8644@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
References: <1448488264-23400-1-git-send-email-sboyd@codeaurora.org>
 <1448488264-23400-2-git-send-email-sboyd@codeaurora.org>
 <20151125234711.GT8644@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
 <565C6714.802@suse.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <565C6714.802@suse.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2167
Lines: 45

On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 04:11:16PM +0100, Michal Marek wrote:
> On 2015-11-26 00:47, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 01:51:03PM -0800, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> >> The ARM compiler inserts calls to __aeabi_uidiv() and
> >> __aeabi_idiv() when it needs to perform division on signed and
> >> unsigned integers. If a processor has support for the udiv and
> >> sdiv division instructions the calls to these support routines
> >> can be replaced with those instructions. Therefore, record the
> >> location of calls to these library functions into two sections
> >> (one for udiv and one for sdiv) similar to how we trace calls to
> >> mcount. When the kernel boots up it will check to see if the
> >> processor supports the instructions and then patch the call sites
> >> with the instruction.
> > 
> > Do we have any resolution on these programs which modify the object
> > files in-place, rather than breaking any hard-links which may be
> > present (eg, as a result of using ccache in hard-link mode) ?
> 
> Good point, but I do not think anybody is using CCACHE_HARDLINK with the
> kernel.

That's wrong then, because I've been using it for a very long time with
my nightly builds. :)  Therefore, there is somebody!

> As the manpage says, it is going to confuse make, so the time
> saved by ccache would be offset by make trying to recompile all *.c
> files each time.

>From what I've noticed, it makes a big difference when running nightly
builds.  My nightly builds use O= and always build into an empty target
tree, so there are no old objects back-dated to confuse make.

Even if there were, make would spot that the object is older than the
source, and try to re-make the target again, at which point ccache
would re-hardlink the object after looking up the hashed preprocessed
source.

-- 
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.6Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.
--
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/