From: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>
Cc: Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RANDOM] Move two variables to read_mostly section to save memory
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 19:38:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47657096.50302@cosmosbay.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071216181455.GD14233@stusta.de>
Adrian Bunk a écrit :
> On Sun, Dec 16, 2007 at 06:42:57PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> Adrian Bunk a écrit :
>> ...
>>> And even more funny, with gcc 4.2 and CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE=y your
>>> patch doesn't seem to make any space difference - are you using an older
>>> compiler or even worse CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE=n for being able to see
>>> any space difference?
>>>
>>> In both cases your code uglification would be even more pointless...
>>>
>> I believe that CONFIG_SMP is uglification for you Adrian, but still I am
>> glad linux have it.
>>
>> If your CONFIG_SYSCTL=n is really that important for you, why dont you
>> define a new qualifier that can indeed mark some variables as :
>>
>> const if CONFIG_SYSCTL=n
>> read_mostly if CONFIG_SYCTL=y
>>
>> This way you can keep compiler optimizations for your CONFIG_SYCTL=n, while
>> many people like me can still continue to optimize their kernel.
>>
>> Seeing so many sysctl already read_mostly in kernel, I wonder why you NACK
>> my patch, while it's easy to share your concerns with other people and find
>> a solution.
>
> You omitted an answer to my main important point...
>
> Let me ask it in a more simple way:
>
> Do you see any space difference at all with gcc 4.2 and
> CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE=y ?
>
I am using gcc-4.2.1
CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE=y makes no difference for me.
$ make defconfig
$ egrep "OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE|CONFIG_SMP" .config
CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE=y
CONFIG_SMP=y
$ make vmlinux
$ nm -v vmlinux|grep -4 random_read_wakeup_thresh
c057a02c d excluded_id_list
c057a100 d zero_bdi
c057a180 D random_table
c057a300 d input_pool
c057a400 d random_read_wakeup_thresh
c057a404 d random_write_wakeup_thresh
<SAME HOLE HERE>
c057a480 d blocking_pool
c057a580 d nonblocking_pool
c057a680 d rekey_work
After my patch, I still gain 120 bytes.
Please realize that most people now build their kernels with CONFIG_SMP=y, or
use a distro one (with CONFIG_SMP=y as well)
Your CONFIG_SYSCTL point is valid and should be addressed by a separate patch set.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-12-16 18:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-12-16 11:45 Eric Dumazet
2007-12-16 13:00 ` Adrian Bunk
2007-12-16 14:44 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-12-16 16:53 ` Adrian Bunk
2007-12-16 17:42 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-12-16 18:14 ` Adrian Bunk
2007-12-16 18:38 ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2007-12-16 19:17 ` Adrian Bunk
2007-12-17 0:33 ` Matt Mackall
2007-12-16 17:34 ` Matt Mackall
2007-12-16 17:56 ` Eric Dumazet
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=47657096.50302@cosmosbay.com \
--to=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bunk@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mpm@selenic.com \
/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®