From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org, arjan@linux.intel.com,
jbeulich@suse.com, ling.ml@alipay.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/asm] x86/defconfig: Turn on CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE= y in the 64-bit defconfig
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 16:42:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130126154256.GB16044@pd.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8b0dfc4a-6f9c-498a-9844-4d99deb3052f@email.android.com>
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.
--
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-26 15:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-25 14:11 [PATCH] [x86]: Compiler Option Os is better on latest x86 ling.ma.program
2013-01-26 12:25 ` [tip:x86/asm] x86/defconfig: Turn on CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE= y in the 64-bit defconfig tip-bot for Ma Ling
2013-01-26 12:52 ` Borislav Petkov
2013-01-26 15:18 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-26 15:42 ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2013-01-26 19:43 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-01-26 21:02 ` Steven Rostedt
2013-01-26 21:04 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-27 12:49 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-01-26 21:08 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-28 17:15 ` [PATCH] [x86]: Compiler Option Os is better on latest x86 Valdis.Kletnieks
2013-01-29 8:12 ` Ingo Molnar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130126154256.GB16044@pd.tnic \
--to=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=ling.ml@alipay.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®