On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 02:21:43PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: [] > > You've did a tool. Documenting this tool to have it available for > > testers/janitors/maintainers is a better way, than to have all that > > opinions/problems with merging-to-mainline. > > There is no problem with his patch. > > His patch improves the build process.
I would like to know timing, btw. Size, especially shown 1%, doesn't matter if link time increased dramatically. `Allyes' config, when i had fast and rammish machine was terrible thing (last winter). If 32 cores/cpus is will of author, then i'm even more suspicious. > And there's no reason to hide this from the users. Patch? Did i said patch? Ah, patch. Yes -- hide it, because it against LKML's rules. I can provide ftp for such things, easily. I said tool _and_ documentation. Because if developers don't know about `static' code or _data_ and cann't find out that, then small description is more than welcome, i think. But, tool. Hide it also, becasue it's kind of thing to be shamed of (: == untested, for demonstation only == SED_REM=' /\.text\./s|\.text\.|.text_|g; /\.data\./s|\.data\.|.data_|g; /\.bss\.p/s|\.bss\.p|.bss_p|g; # for .bss.page_aligned only ' for place in linux/arch/* linux/kernel linux/include/asm-* do case $place *cris) ADDON='/\.text\.__/n;' ;; *powerpc) ADDON='/\.data\.rel/n;' ;; *parisc) ADDON='/\.data\.vm[p0]/n;' ;; *frv) ADDON='/\.bss\.stack/n;';; esac sed -i -e "$ADDON$SED_REM" `find $place -type f` done done == == [] > > > I don't understand why you are opposed to toolchain helping > > > humans to get optimized result. But it's fine with me. > > > I won't force anyone to select CONFIG_DISCARD_UNUSED_SECTIONS. > > > > That's why. It's treating symptoms, isn't it? > > There's nothing that requires treatment. [Help for] The developers/contributors of those drivers, no? > It's a matter of fact that the kernel takes advantages from some > features of GNU binutils and GNU gcc that might not be available > in other versions of these tools. > > Whether you like it or not - that's not going to change. I don't like fast, one-sided solutions. > But don't continue arguing about something where you won't win with > words - it's open source, so you can always create a fork of the Linux > kernel that builds with whatever toolchain you want. I just want to have review process to be real not only in C hacking. > The only way you could convince other people from your point of view > would be if your forked version of the kernel would contain advantages > that convince many users to use your kernel rather than Linus' one. > > cu > Adrian > > -- ____ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/