[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200624233724.GA94769@google.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2020 16:37:24 -0700
From: Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com,
kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org, George Burgess IV <gbiv@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/22] kbuild: lto: limit inlining
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 11:20:55PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 01:31:44PM -0700, Sami Tolvanen wrote:
> > This change limits function inlining across translation unit
> > boundaries in order to reduce the binary size with LTO.
> >
> > The -import-instr-limit flag defines a size limit, as the number
> > of LLVM IR instructions, for importing functions from other TUs.
> > The default value is 100, and decreasing it to 5 reduces the size
> > of a stripped arm64 defconfig vmlinux by 11%.
>
> Is that also the right number for x86? What about the effect on
> performance? What did 6 do? or 4?
This is the size limit we decided on for Android after testing on
arm64, but the number is obviously a compromise between code size
and performance. I'd be happy to benchmark this further once other
concerns have been resolved.
Sami
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
