From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>
Cc: Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com>
Subject: Re: CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER [was [PATCH] x86: BUILD_IRQ say .text]
Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 07:46:13 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1217022373.11188.115.camel@pasglop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0807251839190.20617@blonde.site>
On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 19:45 +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote:
>
> I've Cc'ed Ben and linuxppc-dev because I wonder if they're aware
> that several options (I got it from LATENCYTOP, but I think LOCKDEP
> and FTRACE and some others) are doing a "select FRAME_POINTER",
> which forces CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER=y on PowerPC, even though
> FRAME_POINTER is not an option offered on PowerPC. The
> resulting kernels appear to run okay, but I was surprised.
Because the option just does nothing for us ? :-) We always have frame
pointers on powerpc except in some case for leaf functions. I don't know
if the option has any actual effect on the later, but I don't think we
have a case where doing either way would break things.
Cheers,
Ben.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-07-25 21:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.64.0807211828470.26173@blonde.site>
[not found] ` <20080724104459.GI28817@elte.hu>
2008-07-25 18:45 ` CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER [was [PATCH] x86: BUILD_IRQ say .text] Hugh Dickins
2008-07-25 21:46 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2008-07-26 11:02 ` Hugh Dickins
2008-07-26 12:36 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-07-28 13:52 ` Gabriel Paubert
2008-07-28 14:41 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-07-28 14:54 ` Hugh Dickins
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1217022373.11188.115.camel@pasglop \
--to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=travis@sgi.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).