On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 19:58 +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > On Tue, Jan 22, 2008 at 10:37:19AM -0600, Matt Mackall wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 15:39 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > threadinfo-ool.patch: doesnt this break the scheduler? > > > > It didn't when I wrote it, 3+ years ago. But I'm sure it needs to be > > revisited. > > > > > tiny-cflags.patch: obsolete? Isnt CFLAGS already extendable? Question to > > > Sam i guess. > And what was the question then? > > We have today the possibility to say: > make KCFLAGS=-whatever > > and we have plenty of kconfig adjustmenst affecting the gcc options. > > I do not know if this covers it.
Basically the idea was you could specify various flags that affected kernel size, in particular overriding the various bloated alignment defaults. If I were to do this today (if they haven't already become the default), I'd probably add a config var to request minimal alignment instead. -- Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time. -- 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/