On Fri, Aug 25, 2006 at 10:52:26AM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-08-24 at 23:30 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > Applying this doesn't seem to make much sense until it's clear whether a
> > "build everything except for assembler files at once" approach (that
> > needs less globals) or your current "compile only multi-obj at once"
> > approach (that requires more globals).
>
> For the kernel itself, I think that building a directory at once is the
> way forward. For modules, obviously the scope is more limited.
For any desktop or server you buy today your patches are a nice
improvement but not that important.
But projects like embedded systems or OLPC that really need want
kernels should be the same projects that already avoid the
10% size penalty of CONFIG_MODULES=y.
> Either way, I'd like to prevent the unnecessary proliferation of
> __global by instrument the link process somehow so that we get a
> _warning_ during the final link if there are any global symbols which
> aren't actually used.
>...
That would give many false positives from files like fs/libfs.c .
> dwmw2
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 [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
