[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0904202010220.30705@vinegar-pot.mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2009 20:26:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tim Abbott <tabbott@....EDU>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
cc: Linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Anders Kaseorg <andersk@....edu>,
Waseem Daher <wdaher@....edu>,
Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@...glemail.com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Jeff Arnold <jbarnold@....edu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jon Masters <jonathan@...masters.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Add support for compiling with -ffunction-sections
-fdata-sections
On Mon, 20 Apr 2009, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Because I absolutely hate the tools issues that I'm convinced will
> happen the moment I merge it.
I assume you're only worried about toolchain problems for people who are
actually using the -ffunction-sections option. Would it help if the
-ffunction-sections compilation option were marked as experimental until
proven otherwise?
If you're not willing to merge even an experimental option for
-ffunction-sections, would you at least be willing to merge the first
three patches in the patch series? Compiling with -ffunction-sections
would not be supported by the mainline kernel, so any toolchain issues
with it would not be your problem. But any vendor that wants to take
advantage of -ffunction-sections would still be able to use it without
having to maintain 300 lines of scattered changes to the kernel.
-Tim Abbott
--
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