linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] Compile kernel with -fwhole-program --combine

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 28 Aug 2006 12:52:57 +0200
From:	Helge Hafting <helge.hafting@...el.hist.no>
To:	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
CC:	Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-tiny@...enic.com, devel@...top.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Compile kernel with -fwhole-program --combine

David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-08-25 at 16:11 -0400, Rob Landley wrote:
>   
>> BusyBox has been doing this for months now: "build at once" is one of our 
>> config options.  I'd like to point out that gcc eats needs several hundred 
>> megabytes of ram to do this and you have no useful progress indicator between 
>> starting and ending.  But the result is definitely smaller.
>>     
>
> It isn't that bad when you're only building a few files at a time -- I
> wouldn't suggest doing it for the whole kernel.
>   
I suggest a new makefile target for this.

I.e. "make bzImage" as always for those who do development and
recompile after small changes/patches. 

And a "make optImage" (optimized image) when building a
kernel for production use, when you believe compiling every file
and spending lots of extra time is worth it.

Helge Hafting
-
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/