Re: [2.6 patch] remove the CONFIG_CC_ALIGN_* options

[Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>]

On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 06:56:40PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 11:36:54PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > I don't see any use case for the CONFIG_CC_ALIGN_* options:
> > - they are only available if EMBEDDED
> > - people using EMBEDDED will most likely also enable 
> >   CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE
> > - the default for -Os is to disable alignment
> > 
> > In case someone is doing performance comparisons and discovers that the
> > default settings gcc chooses aren't good, the only sane thing is to
> > discuss whether it makes sense to change this, not through offering 
> > options to change this locally.
> 
> I leave it to other to judge if this is wortwhile or not - I have no
> numbers to back up either with or without.
> It is though a nice cleaning effort in the Makefile.
> 
> But if we back-out this then cc-option-aling should go as well,
> including description in Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.txt

My patch doesn't remove cc-option-align, and it's still used in 
arch/i386/Makefile.cpu.

The point of my patch is that there's no reason why a user should set 
different align options (if a developer wants to benchmark different 
align options, adding them to the CFLAGS in the Makefile is still 
trivial).

> 	Sam

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

-
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/