[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071030200040.GA13999@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 20:00:40 +0000
From: Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk>
To: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
Cc: Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...nel.crashing.org>,
Kyle McMartin <kyle@...artin.ca>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Only show RESOURCES_64BIT on relevant architectures
On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 06:13:16AM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 11:42:21AM +0000, Ralf Baechle wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 02:37:19AM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 10:03:16PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
> > > > same HW platform that you want to run with just 32-bit phys (for
> > > > performance).
> > >
> > > Have you measured what the performance difference is?
> >
> > So that's 5668, 256 bytes data and 128 bytes of bss for a total of 6052
> > bytes. Not a whole lot but I still fear some users on the most
> > claustrophobic systems will mind.
>
> Oh, sure, I'm not saying I thought there would be no size difference; I
> was just bemused at the suggestion there was a performance difference.
>
> Unless "won't fit in ROM any more" is considered a performance problem ;-)
I think we've gone way past that that issue NetWinders long ago... in the
2.4 days iirc.
--
Russell King
Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
maintainer of:
-
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