Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751019AbWBLVpc (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Feb 2006 16:45:32 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751452AbWBLVpc (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Feb 2006 16:45:32 -0500 Received: from kanga.kvack.org ([66.96.29.28]:2538 "EHLO kanga.kvack.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751019AbWBLVpb (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Feb 2006 16:45:31 -0500 Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 16:40:46 -0500 From: Benjamin LaHaise To: Adrian Bunk Cc: sam@ravnborg.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC: 2.6 patch] remove the CONFIG_CC_ALIGN_* options Message-ID: <20060212214046.GA20477@kvack.org> References: <20060212174802.GJ30922@stusta.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060212174802.GJ30922@stusta.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 807 Lines: 18 On Sun, Feb 12, 2006 at 06:48:02PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > I don't see any use case for the CONFIG_CC_ALIGN_* options: > - they are only available if EMBEDDED > - people using EMBEDDED will most likely also enable > CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE > - the default for -Os is to disable alignment CONFIG_EMBEDDED should actually be spell CONFIG_ADVANCED. Not everyone testing different alignments is building an embedded system targetted for size. The option is just as useful in doing performance comparisons. Besides, is it really a maintenence load? -ben - 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/