[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191202103248.GB2827@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2019 11:32:48 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Shile Zhang <shile.zhang@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>, x86@...nel.org,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v5 0/7] Speed booting by sorting ORC unwind tables at
build time
On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 07:01:59PM +0800, Shile Zhang wrote:
> This series refactored the original sortextable tools, add ORC unwind
> tables sort at build time.
>
> To sort the ORC unwind tables(.orc_unwind & .orc_unwind_ip) can save
> about 100ms in my test ENV (2C4G VM w/ Xeon 2.5GHz CPU).
> It costs about 30ms sort by new sorttable tool.
IIRC from your previous emails the new build-time sort is actually
shorter than that, so even for single build+run scenarios we win.
The code looks good to me, so:
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
Who it going to apply this? I suppose we could take it through -tip,
like we do with all x86 and objtool related bits.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists