[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJfuBxxQ-dNWHv1VGu7Hh705wZbxmsStDa_-cc=63fDtNZiyjg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2021 12:24:46 -0600
From: jim.cromie@...il.com
To: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
amd-gfx mailing list <amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
intel-gvt-dev@...ts.freedesktop.org,
Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v7 5/8] drm_print: add choice to use dynamic
debug in drm-debug
> I'll try to extract the "executive summary" from this, you tell me if I
> got it right.
>
> So using or not using dynamic debug for DRM debug ends up being about
> shifting the cost between kernel binary size (data section grows by each
> pr_debug call site) and runtime conditionals?
Yes.
> Since the table sizes you mention seem significant enough, I think that
> justifies existence of DRM_USE_DYNAMIC_DEBUG. It would probably be a
> good idea to put some commentary on that there. Ideally including some
> rough estimates both including space cost per call site and space cost
> for a typical distro kernel build?
yeah, agreed. I presume you mean in Kconfig entry,
since commits have some size info now - I have i915, amdgpu, nouveau;
I can see some prose improvements for 5/8
> Regards,
>
> Tvrtko
thanks
Jim
Powered by blists - more mailing lists