[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <yw1x62oxf91s.fsf@unicorn.mansr.com>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 22:26:07 +0100
From: Måns Rullgård <mans@...sr.com>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Nicolas Pitre <nico@...xnic.net>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Måns Rullgård
<mans@...sr.com>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, sam@...nborg.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: Do not allow unaligned accesses when CONFIG_ALIGNMENT_TRAP
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com> writes:
>> It is possible that -fconserve-stack is still valuable on ARM given that
>> it is also used with -mno-unaligned-access for other things than
>> structure packing on the stack, and therefore its merits can be debated
>> independently from the alignment issue at hand.
>
> The big advantage of -fconserve-stack is that it throttles the inliner
> if the inlining would cause too much stack growth. This is something
> you likely want on ARM too, especially as code gets more and more
> complex.
Is there no way to get that effect without also activating the
aggressive packing?
--
Måns Rullgård
mans@...sr.com
--
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