On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 06:13:16AM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 11:42:21AM +0000, Ralf Baechle wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 02:37:19AM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 10:03:16PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > > > > same HW platform that you want to run with just 32-bit phys (for > > > > performance). > > > > > > Have you measured what the performance difference is? > > > > So that's 5668, 256 bytes data and 128 bytes of bss for a total of 6052 > > bytes. Not a whole lot but I still fear some users on the most > > claustrophobic systems will mind. > > Oh, sure, I'm not saying I thought there would be no size difference; I > was just bemused at the suggestion there was a performance difference. > > Unless "won't fit in ROM any more" is considered a performance problem ;-) I think we've gone way past that that issue NetWinders long ago... in the 2.4 days iirc. -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
