From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>
Cc: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: unify x86 Makefile(s)
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2007 03:14:23 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200712290314.23567.ak@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071228221324.GA9105@does.not.exist>
On Friday 28 December 2007 23:13:24 Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 28, 2007 at 10:23:41PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> >...
> > Noteworthy remarks on the unification:
> >...
> > - -funit-at-a-time should be easy to unify but it looks like we have a bug
> > in 32 bit. We only enable -funit-at-a-time for gcc less than 0400 if they
> > support it
>
> No, we _dis_able it on 32bit if a gcc < 4.0 supports it.
>
> > (and I recall it is a gcc 4.00 feature). [-lt -> -gt]
> >...
>
> unit-at-a-time was introduced in upstream gcc 3.4 and backported to some
> popular 3.3 x86_64 branch.
>
> i386 and x86_64 go in exactly opposite directions regarding when to use
> unit-at-a-time, but that was intentional and we should keep it that way.
i386 disabled it because there were claims that it increased stack size
too much, but I haven't seen any real evidence for that. That is why I never
added it to x86-64. On the other hand it tends to shrink text size considerably.
I think it should be reevaluated and enabled by default on i386 again.
BTW there is a patch pending for gcc 4.3+ that prevents optimizations
that increase stack size unduly. Not sure it has been added there yet,
but that was the right fix for these problems anyways.
-Andi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-12-29 2:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-12-28 21:23 [PATCH] x86: unify x86 Makefile(s) Sam Ravnborg
2007-12-28 22:13 ` Adrian Bunk
2007-12-29 2:14 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2007-12-29 8:07 ` Adrian Bunk
2007-12-29 9:39 ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-12-29 9:52 ` Adrian Bunk
2007-12-29 12:16 ` Andi Kleen
2007-12-29 12:54 ` Adrian Bunk
2007-12-29 18:22 ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-12-29 18:24 ` Andi Kleen
2007-12-29 18:58 ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-12-29 21:17 ` Andi Kleen
2007-12-29 21:45 ` Adrian Bunk
2007-12-30 2:00 ` Andi Kleen
2007-12-30 11:01 ` Adrian Bunk
2007-12-29 2:22 ` Andi Kleen
2007-12-29 8:07 ` Sam Ravnborg
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=200712290314.23567.ak@suse.de \
--to=ak@suse.de \
--cc=bunk@kernel.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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