[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140424145535.GA2969@jtriplet-mobl1>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 07:55:35 -0700
From: Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>
To: Michael Opdenacker <michael.opdenacker@...e-electrons.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
fweisbec@...il.com, eparis@...hat.com,
paul.gortmaker@...driver.com, vapier@...too.org,
kyungsik.lee@....com, jslaby@...e.cz, dwight.engen@...cle.com,
pefoley2@...oley.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] init/Kconfig: improve CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE
documentation
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 02:07:33PM +0200, Michael Opdenacker wrote:
> This patch proposes to warn users about the negative performance
> impact of CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE (compiling with -Os instead of -O2).
> For the moment, we are just advising users not to select this option,
> but extra details would be useful.
>
> I made some experiments with this option. All of them yielded
> degraded overall boot time. The kernel is smaller and hence is copied
> and started earlier, but the benefits are quickly offset by the
> slower kernel code. Even the total boot time is usually worse
> than with a regular kernel.
>
> Here are my latest results, on Atmel SAMA5D3 Xplained (ARM),
> Linux 3.10, gzip compressed kernel:
>
> Timestamp O2 Os Diff
> Starting kernel 4.307 s 5.593 s -94 ms
> Starting init 4.213 s 5.549 s -44 ms
> Login prompt 21.085 s 22.900 s +1.815 s
Did you get the times in the upper two rows transposed row/column? Based
on the diffs, I'd guess 4.213s goes in Os "Starting kernel", and 5.593s
goes in O2 "Starting init".
- Josh Triplett
--
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