Re: [patch 00/2] improve .text size on gcc 4.0 and newer compilers

[Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>]

On Thu, Jan 05, 2006 at 02:49:21PM -0800, Martin Bligh wrote:
> 
> >>>What I was proposing was something like, say, arch/i386/popularity.lst, 
> >>>which would simply contain a list of the most popular n% of functions 
> >>>sorted by popularity. As text, of course.
> >>
> >>I suspect that would certainlty work for pure function-based popularity, 
> >>and yes, it has the advantage of being simple (especially for something 
> >>that ends up being almost totally separated from the compiler: if we're 
> >>using this purely to modify link scripts etc with special tools).
> >>
> >>But what about the unlikely/likely conditional hints that we currently do 
> >>by hand? How are you going to sanely maintain a list of those without 
> >>doing that in source code?
> >
> >
> >Dunno. Those bits are all anonymous so marking them in situ is about
> >the only way to go. But we can do better for whole functions.
> 
> Would also make it easier to rank it as a percentage, or group by
> locality of reference to other functions, rather than just a binary
> split of "rare" vs "not-rare".
> 
> Of course it's all very dependant on workload, which drivers you're 
> using too, etc, etc. So a profile that's separate also makes it much
> easier to tweak for one machine than the source base in general, which
> theoretically represents everyone (and thus has little info ;-)).
> 
> Which also makes me think it's easier to mark hot functions than cold
> ones, in a more general maintainance sense.

Yes, I think it definitely makes sense to think in terms of hot
functions. We surely have a nice long tail on the popularity
distribution and only the first 5% or so are actually worth sorting
and packing.

-- 
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 majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/