On 7/6/22 08:20, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 at 15:57, Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 7/6/2022 8:20 AM, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Wed, Jul 6 2022 at 08:06:45 AM -0600, Jeff Law
<jeffreyalaw@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
If I'm understanding things correctly, the original proposal is trying
to make a very special case of profiling work better -- a case that
99.9% of Fedora users do not need or care about. That seems like a
particularly bad cost/benefit for this proposal.
But all Fedora users benefit from performance improvements implemented
as a result of profiling.
Yes, but, IMHO, you need to find another way to do the profiling you
need to get those improvements.
Right. Developers already need to rebuild packages locally. The
suggestion that developers of fedora packages can't improve those
packages without making system-wide profiling work on every fedora
users' machines seems like nonsense.
Let's say you profile something and find a performance problem. You
tweak the code to improve performance. How do you verify if it
improves performance? Do you push the change to rawhide, wait for koji
and bodhi to do their thing, then re-profile with the new packages
from the updates-testing repo? And if that didn't work, push another
change to rawhide, wait for koji and bodhi, and re-profile? Of course
not, that would be ridiculous.
You build locally and profile using your locally built packages. So
you're already doing rebuilds, and you're already profiling custom
builds anyway. So you can add frame pointers back in to your local
builds that are used for profiling. It's not essential for frame
pointers to be present in the official koji builds for you to do that.
It might be a minor convenience because it reduces the number of
system libs that you need to rebuild locally, but it's just a
convenience, not a necessity.
Maybe we could make it easier to do local mock builds (or copr builds,
or koji scratch builds) with changes to RPM_OPT_FLAGS to simplify
rebuilding to get frame pointers. But pushing that to every user just
so a handful of people don't have a few extra steps is the wrong
trade-off.
I mentioned this in the FESCO meeting, but this proposal[1] is designed
to make these kind of optflag changes easier to do.
-Tom
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RPMMacrosForBuildFlags
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
