[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130126154256.GB16044@pd.tnic>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 16:42:56 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, arjan@...ux.intel.com,
jbeulich@...e.com, ling.ml@...pay.com, rostedt@...dmis.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/asm] x86/defconfig: Turn on
CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE= y in the 64-bit defconfig
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 07:18:26AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On the CPUs Ling is testing on the downsides of -Os probably matter
>less, in particular since rep movsb works well.
>
> It is questionable as a generic default, though.
>
> The whole -Ok discussion came from that.
Hmm,
maybe this warrants some sort of a text addition to the config option
about when and where it is ok to select -Os. Also, is it so that
on those CPUs, -Os is always better or at least neutral so that it
doesn't cause any perf regressions when people enable it? I mean, I
see only netperf and volano runs in the commit message, maybe running
a comprehensive set of benchmarks would give us a much more detailed
picture...
Thanks.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
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