[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121030091440.GA10272@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 10:14:40 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Vagin <avagin@...nvz.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...il.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL 0/9] perf/core improvements and fixes
* Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-10-30 at 09:18 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > > The optimal way, I guess, would be to have some cache file
> > > > with the results of such feature tests, that would be created
> > > > and then used till the build fails using its findings, which
> > > > would trigger a new feature check round, followed by an
> > > > automatic rebuild.
I did not write that.
I think making the feature tests parallel would be enough to
speed it all up - caching brings in a new set of problems. The
tests are mostly independent and the feature test makefile rules
could be parallelized like the object file rules.
> autoconf!! ;-)
>
> /me runs
hey, we build perf much faster than autoconf's 'configure'
script finishes running ;-)
Thanks,
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