Sorry for the delay. On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 02:01:45PM +0100, Michal Marek wrote: > Dne 15.11.2015 v 18:58 Andi Kleen napsal(a): > > On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 11:27:05AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > >> Hi Michal, > >> > >> I notice that the kbuild tree (relative to Linus' tree) only contains > >> lots of merges and these 2 commits from April 2014: > > > > Really should get in that patch officially. I have a variety of users. > > And it clearly has been tested long enough in linux-next :) > > Michal, enough to just repost it? > > So the commit in kbuild.git tree is identical to what is being tested > out of tree? Could you nevertheless provide an updated changelog? One Yes. I'll provide a new ChangeLog. > (and actually only) of Linus' objections was that it was not clear at > all what the actual benefits for the kernel itself are. Do you have some > benchmarks perhaps, where LTO achieves a preformance gain? The main users use it to shrink the kernel. I'll run some new benchmarks. > Also, did the > compile time impact change with gcc 5.x? 5.x is better than 4.x but it's still a slower. It's also not incremential. -Andi -- ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Speaking for myself only -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
