From: Denys Vlasenko
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 19:05:17 +0200
> On 04/16/2015 02:38 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> On Thu, 2015-04-16 at 13:14 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
>>
>>> However, without BUG_ONs, function is still a bit big
>>> on PREEMPT configs.
>>
>> Only on allyesconfig builds, that
From: Eric Dumazet
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 10:42:16 -0700
> On Fri, 2015-04-17 at 19:05 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
>
>> How do you expect one to find excessively large inlines,
>> if not on allyesconfig build?
>
> Tuning kernel sources based on allyesconfig build _size_ only is
> terrible. We
On 04/17/2015 07:42 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-04-17 at 19:05 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
>> How do you expect one to find excessively large inlines,
>> if not on allyesconfig build?
>
> Tuning kernel sources based on allyesconfig build _size_ only is
> terrible. We could build an
On Fri, 2015-04-17 at 19:05 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> How do you expect one to find excessively large inlines,
> if not on allyesconfig build?
Tuning kernel sources based on allyesconfig build _size_ only is
terrible. We could build an interpreter based kernel and maybe reduce
its size by
On 04/16/2015 02:38 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-04-16 at 13:14 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
>
>> However, without BUG_ONs, function is still a bit big
>> on PREEMPT configs.
>
> Only on allyesconfig builds, that nobody use but to prove some points
> about code size.
How do you expect
On Fri, 2015-04-17 at 19:05 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
How do you expect one to find excessively large inlines,
if not on allyesconfig build?
Tuning kernel sources based on allyesconfig build _size_ only is
terrible. We could build an interpreter based kernel and maybe reduce
its size by 50%
On 04/17/2015 07:42 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Fri, 2015-04-17 at 19:05 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
How do you expect one to find excessively large inlines,
if not on allyesconfig build?
Tuning kernel sources based on allyesconfig build _size_ only is
terrible. We could build an
On 04/16/2015 02:38 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Thu, 2015-04-16 at 13:14 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
However, without BUG_ONs, function is still a bit big
on PREEMPT configs.
Only on allyesconfig builds, that nobody use but to prove some points
about code size.
How do you expect one to
From: Eric Dumazet eric.duma...@gmail.com
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 10:42:16 -0700
On Fri, 2015-04-17 at 19:05 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
How do you expect one to find excessively large inlines,
if not on allyesconfig build?
Tuning kernel sources based on allyesconfig build _size_ only is
From: Denys Vlasenko dvlas...@redhat.com
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 19:05:17 +0200
On 04/16/2015 02:38 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Thu, 2015-04-16 at 13:14 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
However, without BUG_ONs, function is still a bit big
on PREEMPT configs.
Only on allyesconfig builds, that
From: Denys Vlasenko
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 13:14:14 +0200
> It would help if you tell me how I should change the patches.
Why ask Eric when I told you exactly how to change the patch to make
it acceptable, so please do so.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
On Thu, 2015-04-16 at 13:14 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> However, without BUG_ONs, function is still a bit big
> on PREEMPT configs.
Only on allyesconfig builds, that nobody use but to prove some points
about code size.
If you look at net_generic(), it is mostly used from code that is
Hi David, Eric,
As you may have surmised, this patch wasn't a result of me looking
at networking code; rather, it is a result of semi-automated search
for huge inlines.
The last step of this process would be the submission of patches.
I am expecting a range of responses from maintainers:
On Thu, 2015-04-16 at 13:14 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
However, without BUG_ONs, function is still a bit big
on PREEMPT configs.
Only on allyesconfig builds, that nobody use but to prove some points
about code size.
If you look at net_generic(), it is mostly used from code that is
normally
Hi David, Eric,
As you may have surmised, this patch wasn't a result of me looking
at networking code; rather, it is a result of semi-automated search
for huge inlines.
The last step of this process would be the submission of patches.
I am expecting a range of responses from maintainers:
From: Denys Vlasenko dvlas...@redhat.com
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 13:14:14 +0200
It would help if you tell me how I should change the patches.
Why ask Eric when I told you exactly how to change the patch to make
it acceptable, so please do so.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
From: Denys Vlasenko
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 14:25:11 +0200
> On x86 allyesconfig build:
> The function compiles to 130 bytes of machine code.
> It has 493 callsites.
> Total reduction of vmlinux size: 27906 bytes.
>
>textdata bss dec hex filename
> 82447071
On Tue, 2015-04-14 at 17:04 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> On 04/14/2015 04:21 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > On Tue, 2015-04-14 at 15:57 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> >
> >> My allyesconfig, with BUG_ON's commented out:
> >>
> >
> > Right. But I can tell you nobody uses lockdep on a production
On 04/14/2015 04:21 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-04-14 at 15:57 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
>
>> My allyesconfig, with BUG_ON's commented out:
>>
>
> Right. But I can tell you nobody uses lockdep on a production kernel.
>
> Here, at Google, we get what I described.
I'm trying to get
On Tue, 2015-04-14 at 15:57 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> My allyesconfig, with BUG_ON's commented out:
>
Right. But I can tell you nobody uses lockdep on a production kernel.
Here, at Google, we get what I described.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
On 04/14/2015 03:19 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-04-14 at 14:25 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
>> On x86 allyesconfig build:
>> The function compiles to 130 bytes of machine code.
>> It has 493 callsites.
>> Total reduction of vmlinux size: 27906 bytes.
>>
>>text data
On Tue, 2015-04-14 at 14:25 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> On x86 allyesconfig build:
> The function compiles to 130 bytes of machine code.
> It has 493 callsites.
> Total reduction of vmlinux size: 27906 bytes.
>
>textdata bss dec hex filename
> 82447071 22255384
Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 02:25:11PM CEST, dvlas...@redhat.com wrote:
>On x86 allyesconfig build:
>The function compiles to 130 bytes of machine code.
>It has 493 callsites.
>Total reduction of vmlinux size: 27906 bytes.
Hmm. That is not much. How about performance impacts?
>
> text
On x86 allyesconfig build:
The function compiles to 130 bytes of machine code.
It has 493 callsites.
Total reduction of vmlinux size: 27906 bytes.
text data bss dec hex filename
82447071 22255384 20627456 125329911 77861f7 vmlinux4
82419165 22255384 20627456 125302005
On x86 allyesconfig build:
The function compiles to 130 bytes of machine code.
It has 493 callsites.
Total reduction of vmlinux size: 27906 bytes.
text data bss dec hex filename
82447071 22255384 20627456 125329911 77861f7 vmlinux4
82419165 22255384 20627456 125302005
On Tue, 2015-04-14 at 14:25 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
On x86 allyesconfig build:
The function compiles to 130 bytes of machine code.
It has 493 callsites.
Total reduction of vmlinux size: 27906 bytes.
textdata bss dec hex filename
82447071 22255384 20627456
On Tue, 2015-04-14 at 15:57 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
My allyesconfig, with BUG_ON's commented out:
Right. But I can tell you nobody uses lockdep on a production kernel.
Here, at Google, we get what I described.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
From: Denys Vlasenko dvlas...@redhat.com
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 14:25:11 +0200
On x86 allyesconfig build:
The function compiles to 130 bytes of machine code.
It has 493 callsites.
Total reduction of vmlinux size: 27906 bytes.
textdata bss dec hex filename
On Tue, 2015-04-14 at 17:04 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
On 04/14/2015 04:21 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Tue, 2015-04-14 at 15:57 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
My allyesconfig, with BUG_ON's commented out:
Right. But I can tell you nobody uses lockdep on a production kernel.
On 04/14/2015 04:21 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Tue, 2015-04-14 at 15:57 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
My allyesconfig, with BUG_ON's commented out:
Right. But I can tell you nobody uses lockdep on a production kernel.
Here, at Google, we get what I described.
I'm trying to get to the
On 04/14/2015 03:19 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Tue, 2015-04-14 at 14:25 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
On x86 allyesconfig build:
The function compiles to 130 bytes of machine code.
It has 493 callsites.
Total reduction of vmlinux size: 27906 bytes.
text data bss dec
Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 02:25:11PM CEST, dvlas...@redhat.com wrote:
On x86 allyesconfig build:
The function compiles to 130 bytes of machine code.
It has 493 callsites.
Total reduction of vmlinux size: 27906 bytes.
Hmm. That is not much. How about performance impacts?
text data
32 matches
Mail list logo
