| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 11:40:44 +0100 From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org> To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] Core support for --combine -fwhole-program On Fri, 2006-08-25 at 12:30 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > My hope is "insane" would be something like "1 GB of RAM" that is no > longer insane on current computers. [1] Maybe -- but still, that's quite a steep requirement, and would also require a fairly major redesign of the current kbuild architecture. I'm inclined to stick with per-directory builds for now, which is both relatively simple to implement and where the _majority_ of the benefit it likely to be seen. Whole-kernel optimisation is something I'm inclined to leave until LTO happens -- but don't let me stop you from investigating it. > > I suspected that most of the 'further savings' to which you refer above > > could be achieved more easily with -ffunction-sections -fdata-sections > > --gc-sections > > AFAIR -ffunction-sections/-fdata-sections cause some overhead in the > resulting binary? Not that I'm aware of. There's overhead in the resulting ELF files, but we combine sections in the vmlinux.lds so there isn't even that overhead in the vmlinux. -- dwmw2 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists