Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 30 May 2023 00:59:30 -0700
From:   Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
To:     Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
        "Masami Hiramatsu (Google)" <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
        "Steven Rostedt (Google)" <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Ross Zwisler <zwisler@chromium.org>,
        Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>,
        Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@loongson.cn>,
        Yang Jihong <yangjihong1@huawei.com>,
        Kan Liang <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>,
        Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@amd.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
        K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/16] Address some perf memory/data size issues
Message-ID: <ZHWs4o9SBqfspNds@tassilo>
References: <20230526183401.2326121-1-irogers@google.com>
 <ZHWCPXKo2fFJmtlT@tassilo>
 <CAP-5=fXXykcwjXjd+W=8Eez79JhmuKhf1Z-1R_8+AD4XdY4a8A@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAP-5=fXXykcwjXjd+W=8Eez79JhmuKhf1Z-1R_8+AD4XdY4a8A@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

> BSS won't count toward file size, which the patches were primarily
> going after - but checking the size numbers I have miscalculated from
> reading size's output that I'm not familiar with. The numbers are
> still improved, but I just see a 37kb saving, with 5kb more in
> .rodata. Something but not much. .data.rel.ro is larger, which imo is
> good, but those pages will still be dirtied so a mute point wrt file
> size and memory overhead.

The way perf is written (lots of separate code depending on a single high level
switch) most pages probably won't be dirtied.

> 
> For huge pages I thought it was correct that things are aligned by max
> page size which I thought on x86-64 was 2MB, so I tried:
> EXTRA_LDFLAGS="-z max-page-size=4096"
> but it made no difference to anything, and with:
> EXTRA_CFLAGS="-Wl,-z,max-page-size=4096"
> EXTRA_CXXFLAGS="-Wl,-z,max-page-size=4096"
> file size just got worse.

The default alignment to 2MB was dropped in the GNU toolchain in 2018 or
so.

-Andi