[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100528070026.GA31058@elte.hu>
Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 09:00:26 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Fr?d?ric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL, v2] perf changes
* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 25 May 2010, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > 75 files changed, 1847 insertions(+), 3147 deletions(-)
>
> I was excited by this ("A code _reduction_! Will wonders never cease?"), but
> it turns out that all of the reduction was due to removing some unused
> utility functions from the user-level tools.
Simple things first and maybe it turns into a habit!
> The actual kernel still grew:
>
> 32 files changed, 1327 insertions(+), 964 deletions(-)
>
> oh well. Merged anyway.
Hey, while i have to admit to being a member of the infinitely large group of
kernel developers working hard to ensure that the kernel's size follows
Moore's Law - this time i beg to differ, as we _did_ manage to shrink the
kernel! ;-)
Here's the before/after vmlinux comparison:
(x86 defconfig, 64-bit): vmlinux:
text data bss dec hex filename
.......................................................
cad719d (before): 8441843 1281100 983876 10706819 a35f83 vmlinux
c5617b2 ( after): 8417488 1277724 983876 10679088 a2f330 vmlinux
.......................................................
-24.35K -3.37K
-0.28% -0.26%
Ob'Suggestion: we could help debloating efforts by officially declaring to
take provably-debloating patches up to -rc4? (with a vmlinux comparison
mandated in the changelog or such)
Debloating patches tend to reduce complexity, and hence are more
regression-resistent. (They are also rare, so it's not like we would be
risking a flood of patches.)
That would be a clever way to redirect the creative energies of kernel
developers who are otherwise bored by -rc1's legendary stability and always
try to sneak further features upstream post -rc1.
Such a policy would mean that while the merge window for bloating patches is a
strict ~1.5 weeks, the merge window for debloating patches would be a generous
~1.5 months.
Maybe such a mild hint would help propagate the idea some more.
Dunno - just an idea,
Ingo
--
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