From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934021AbXGWTO3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jul 2007 15:14:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1761486AbXGWTOT (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jul 2007 15:14:19 -0400 Received: from mailout.stusta.mhn.de ([141.84.69.5]:42520 "EHLO mailhub.stusta.mhn.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1762099AbXGWTOS (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jul 2007 15:14:18 -0400 Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 21:13:42 +0200 From: Adrian Bunk To: Al Viro Cc: Sam Ravnborg , Alan Modra , Roland McGrath , Paul Mackerras , David Miller , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: "build-id" changes break sparc64 Message-ID: <20070723191342.GO26212@stusta.de> 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> <20070723185648.GK21668@ftp.linux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070723185648.GK21668@ftp.linux.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 07:56:48PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > 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... Shouldn't "allyesconfig" be the worst case? cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed