Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932586AbVL2H7x (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Dec 2005 02:59:53 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932587AbVL2H7x (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Dec 2005 02:59:53 -0500 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:3780 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932586AbVL2H7x (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Dec 2005 02:59:53 -0500 Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 08:59:36 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Adrian Bunk Cc: lkml , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Arjan van de Ven , Matt Mackall Subject: Re: [patch 00/2] improve .text size on gcc 4.0 and newer compilers Message-ID: <20051229075936.GC20177@elte.hu> References: <20051228114637.GA3003@elte.hu> <20051229043835.GC4872@stusta.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051229043835.GC4872@stusta.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-ELTE-SpamScore: 0.0 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=0.0 required=5.9 tests=AWL autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.0.3 0.0 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1528 Lines: 36 * Adrian Bunk wrote: > > unit-at-a-time still increases the kernel stack footprint somewhat (by > > about 5% in the CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE case), but not by the insane degree > > gcc3 used to, which prompted the original -fno-unit-at-a-time addition. > >... > > Please hold off this patch. > > I do already plan to look at this after the smoke has cleared after > the 4k stacks issue. I want to avoid two different knobs both with > negative effects on stack usage (currently CONFIG_4KSTACKS=y, and > after your patch gcc >= 4.0) giving a low testing coverage of the > worst cases. this is obviously not 2.6.15 stuff, so we've got enough time to see the effects. [ And what does "I do plan to look at this" mean? When precisely, and can i thus go to other topics without the issue being dropped on the floor indefinitely? ] also note that the inlining patch actually _reduces_ average stack footprint by ~3-4%: orig +inlining # of functions above 256 bytes: 683 660 total stackspace, bytes: 148492 142884 it is the unit-at-a-time patch that increases stack footprint (by about 7-8%, which together with the inlining patch gives a net ~5%). 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/