From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1764145AbXGWS5P@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1764145AbXGWS5P (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 23 Jul 2007 14:57:15 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757604AbXGWS47
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Mon, 23 Jul 2007 14:56:59 -0400
Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:53439 "EHLO
	ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1756983AbXGWS47 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 23 Jul 2007 14:56:59 -0400
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 19:56:48 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>
To: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
Cc: Alan Modra <amodra@bigpond.net.au>, Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>,
       Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
       Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: "build-id" changes break sparc64
Message-ID: <20070723185648.GK21668@ftp.linux.org.uk>
References: <20070723062759.GB3933@uranus.ravnborg.org> <20070723072613.E3A504D0489@magilla.localdomain> <20070723081435.GA4644@uranus.ravnborg.org> <20070723092559.GA24088@bubble.grove.modra.org> <20070723114936.GH21668@ftp.linux.org.uk> <20070723180048.GA8268@uranus.ravnborg.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20070723180048.GA8268@uranus.ravnborg.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 08:00:48PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 12:49:36PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 06:55:59PM +0930, Alan Modra wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 10:14:35AM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> > > > But I would still like to hear from Alan what the benefits are.
> > > 
> > > See http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2004-10/msg00178.html
> > 
> > What does _not_ doing intermediates do to memory footprint of ld(1)
> > and time spent in there?
> 
> x86_64 defconfig
> 
> rm vmlinux*; time make vmlinux
> 
> Vanilla tree: ~7,7 sec
> With single shot ld (Roland's patch): 8,3 secs
> 
> So as expected slower. As we link twice the cost is ~0,3 sec 
> for a x86_64 defconfig link on my box.

defconfig is not too interesting, but anyway - how much memory does it
take in process?  And, obviously, what kind of box it is?
 
> So it should be beneficial to do it and Alan's link did not really
> convince me for the kernel usage.
> Al - do you have any input there?

Depends.  If more-or-less allmodconfig doesn't kick everything else out
of cache and doesn't end up creating fsckloads of seeks...

Actually, if you want a killer, see what happens when building with debug
info...