Re: cross compilation

[Valdis . Kletnieks]

On Tue, 07 Jun 2016 02:27:03 +0530, Shyam Saini said:

> To choose best optimized code, i need to first compile them and then
> disassemble  the compiled code, where a change in single line would make a
> significant difference in the performance.

Note that due to things like cache line misses, looking at the code will
tell you almost nothing about which is *really* the "best" code...

> So, my question is how to compile* x86 based network drivers  on x86_64
> Ubuntu machine*. Currently I'm running Ubuntu 14.04.

Why do you need to cross-compile?  Just build the drivers as x86_64.  Pretty
much anybody who actually *cares* about performance has moved off 32-bit
kernels a while ago (unless you're stuck with an embedded 32-bit CPU).


pgpI0ezvWXnSQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies

cross compilation

[Shyam Saini]

Hi all,

I'm trying to figure out optimized code for some network drivers. I'm
replacing certain APIs in the code and compare code for each API.

To choose best optimized code, i need to first compile them and then
disassemble  the compiled code, where a change in single line would make a
significant difference in
the performance.

So, my question is how to compile* x86 based network drivers  on x86_64
Ubuntu machine*. Currently I'm running Ubuntu 14.04.

Please help me out


Thanks
___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies

Re: Building modules: missing scripts/basic/Makefile

[Aruna Hewapathirane]

> Hi Aruna,
>
> I ran dpkg -s linux-headers-$(uname -r) and the status indicated it was all 
> installed ok. Just to be sure I reinstalled it as well > as the dependencies 
> (linux-headers-3.16.0-4-common and linux-kbuild-3.16). Reinstalling them 
> seems to have not made
> any difference as my Makefile is still looking for a Makefile that does not 
> seem to exist (which ultimately should be located
> in /usr/src/linux-kbuild-3.16/scripts/basic/).

Hi Steven,
Could you please post the output of make when you run it please ? And
what does ls -alh /lib/modules show you ? And what does ls -alh
/usr/src show you ?

___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies

Re: Building modules: missing scripts/basic/Makefile

[Steven Laabs]

> Hi Steven, please verify the headers are correctly installed by running:
> dpkg -s linux-headers-$(uname -r) .
> 
> If they are not properly installed please run:
> apt-get install kernel-headers-$(uname -r)
> 
> You should be able to build :)
> 
> Good luck - Aruna

Hi Aruna,

I ran dpkg -s linux-headers-$(uname -r) and the status indicated it was all 
installed ok. Just to be sure I reinstalled it as well as the dependencies 
(linux-headers-3.16.0-4-common and linux-kbuild-3.16). Reinstalling them seems 
to have not made any difference as my Makefile is still looking for a Makefile 
that does not seem to exist (which ultimately should be located in 
/usr/src/linux-kbuild-3.16/scripts/basic/).

___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies

Re: list etiquette

[Anuz Pratap Singh Tomar]

On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 9:53 AM, Tobin Harding  wrote:

> LKML list etiquette question.
>
> When asking a [simple] question that receives an suitable answer is it
> correct
> etiquette to reply with a thank you email or is this just adding noise to
> the
> list?
>
> Generally, it is understood.
Here are some mailing list for guidelines which might be relevant

http://kernelnewbies.org/mailinglistguidelines


> thanks,
> Tobin.
>
> ___
> Kernelnewbies mailing list
> Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
> http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
>



-- 
Thank you
Warm Regards
Anuz
___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies

Re: list etiquette

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Mon, 6 Jun 2016, Tobin Harding wrote:

> LKML list etiquette question.
>
> When asking a [simple] question that receives an suitable answer is
> it correct etiquette to reply with a thank you email or is this just
> adding noise to the list?

  i would just let it go, unless you have something you want to add,
or possibly a summary that would be useful for future readers.

rday

p.s. conversely, if you're *answering* someone's question, take the
time to really flesh it out so it's as useful as possible to as many
people as possible.

-- 


Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:   http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:   http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday



___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies

list etiquette

[Tobin Harding]

LKML list etiquette question.

When asking a [simple] question that receives an suitable answer is it correct
etiquette to reply with a thank you email or is this just adding noise to the
list?

thanks,
Tobin.

___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies

Re: inline functions

[Muni Sekhar]

On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 9:08 PM, Augusto Mecking Caringi
 wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 11:59 AM, Muni Sekhar  wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I tested with the below mentioned code("inline.c") to understand about
>> inline functions.
>>
>> I explicitly instructed gcc to translate inline.c to inline.s.
>>
>> Next I removed the inline keyword from inline.c and re-created the
>> inline.s file, but I don’t see any difference in the assembly code. Is
>> it correct behavior?
>>
>> Could you guys point few good examples to understand the concept of inline?
>
> Hi Muni,
>
> Probably gcc is automatic inlining your function even in the
> absence of 'inline' keyword...
>
> Take a look here:
>
> 
> http://www.cocoabuilder.com/archive/xcode/269025-how-to-disable-gcc-automatic-inlining.html

Thanks Augusto.


>
> And here:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Optimize-Options.html
>
> There are a few inline related flags, including this:
>
> -finline-functions-called-once
> Consider all static functions called once for inlining into their
> caller even if they are not marked inline. If a call to a given
> function is integrated, then the function is not output as assembler
> code in its own right.
> Enabled at levels -O1, -O2, -O3 and -Os.
>
> Best regards,
>
> --
> Augusto Mecking Caringi



-- 
Thanks,
Sekhar

___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies