Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 23 Jun 2006 14:56:00 +0200 | Subject | Re: 2.6.17-mm1 | From | Franck Bui-Huu <> |
| |
Franck Bui-Huu wrote: > Mel Gorman wrote: >> On (22/06/06 19:25), Franck Bui-Huu didst pronounce: >>>> I know, but what I'm getting at is that ARCH_PFN_OFFSET may be unnecessary >>>> with flatmem-relax-requirement-for-memory-to-start-at-pfn-0.patch applied. >>> yes it seems so. But ARCH_PFN_OFFSET has been used before your patch >>> has been sent. So your patch seems to be incomplete... >> Difficult to argue with that logic. >> > > sorry, I was just meaning that ARCH_PFN_OFFSET had been introduced to > solve this before your patch has been sent. So the requirement for > memory to start at pfn 0 is already solved. > > Your patch solves the problem in a different way, but it's > incompatible with the current one (ARCH_PFN_OFFSET). > > IMHO the question is now, which method is the best one ? If it's yours > the we probably need to get ride of the previous method and add yours > (but don't forget to modify arch such ARM which are currently using > ARCH_PFN_OFFSET). >
maybe these figures can help to make our choice:
text data bss dec hex filename 2226384 223824 110624 2560832 271340 vmlinux-arch-pfn-offset-0 2228488 223824 110624 2562936 271b78 vmlinux-arch-pfn-offset-not-0 2226964 223856 110624 2561444 2715a4 vmlinux-out-of-line-pfn-to-page
Arch is MIPS and I used gcc 3.4.4
So your solution gives the smallest kernel with my config although the win is only 0.1%. Maybe it would be good to have ARM figures/opinion too.
Franck - 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/
| |