From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Woodhouse Subject: Re: about size optimizations (Re: Not as much ccache win as I expected) Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2008 08:43:23 +0100 Message-ID: <1213429403.26255.298.camel@pmac.infradead.org> References: <8499950a0806131452j5dc9574dk336e9e06ee9e1785@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <8499950a0806131452j5dc9574dk336e9e06ee9e1785@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-kbuild-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Oleg Verych Cc: linux-embedded , linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, segher@kernel.crashing.org On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 22:52 +0100, Oleg Verych wrote: > Using same `gcc -E` principle, I once had a dream to create > build with something like "whole-kernel-at-time" optimising > compiler option: Doing it for the whole kernel probably doesn't buy you a whole lot more than doing it a bit more selectively, which is what I was doing in http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/8/24/212 I think Segher has been playing with it a bit recently, and confirms my suspicion that combining kernel/ with arch/$ARCH/kernel, and mm/ with arch/$ARCH/mm, is also a big win. The GCC problems should mostly be fixed now, I think -- we just need to have another go at doing the Kbuild side of it properly. -- dwmw2