[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48A34260.3070506@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 16:21:52 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
"Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <lclaudio@...g.org>,
Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: Efficient x86 and x86_64 NOP microbenchmarks
Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 04:00:37PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
>>> Now the numbers have shown that just by not using frame pointer (
>>> -pg right now implies frame pointer) you can get more benefit
>>> than what you lose from using non optimal nops.
>>>
>>>
>> No, I can easily make a patch that does not use frame pointers but still
>>
>
> Not without patching gcc. Try it. The patch is not very difficult and i did
> it here, but it needs a patch.
>
OK, I admit you are right ;-)
I got the error message:
gcc: -pg and -fomit-frame-pointer are incompatible
-- Steve
--
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