On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 07:10:01PM -0000, Daan De Meyer via devel wrote: > > Regressions of such magnitude can veto such changes, especially when > > they hit everyone, not just those who are highly dependent on the > > profiling tools the proposal is concerned about. > > The kernel benchmarks were added as an example of openly available data we > could find on the potential impact of frame pointers. Note that the email > from Mel Gorman is all we have to go on. Unfortunately the original data from > the benchmarks is gone so I can't try to reproduce them. I've emailed Mel to > see if he still has the benchmarks stored somewhere so we can perhaps try to > reproduce the results. > > I've added a clarification to the change proposal that we don't intend to > actually compile the kernel with frame pointers
OK, so the (old!) kernel benchmarks are not of little relevance. I think that this really needs to be benchmarked. Without that the discussion will just go on in circles. There are two nice options for this: either copr, where you first build the redhat-rpm-config with the adjusted options and then rebuild some subset of rawhide to be able to do benchmarks, or just the same thing locally on a server with a bunch of CPUs. One architecture should be enough. Mini-rebuilds like that take a few days, so it's entirely possible to do. Zbyszek _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
