Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2013 18:47:22 -0700 From: Juli Mallett <juli@clockworksquid.com> To: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: Warner Losh <imp@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-mips@freebsd.org" <freebsd-mips@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Can we undo the octeon hack? Message-ID: <CACVs6=9mjoB7LQ4OkvT7CJ8b0cG_G9o9XJsAauqxUYwo7MFpkQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <8C6BE511-2CCD-434F-BE72-43F350E8AA2C@bsdimp.com> References: <CAJ-VmonJg2BhBdckFb1O79ZnWrXKZhT%2Bku9SjuswLui6iZC1Ow@mail.gmail.com> <6401792509903023722@unknownmsgid> <F0B68A50-B5BF-426E-874C-1EFC03CAEAEB@bsdimp.com> <CACVs6=_Ss_C0v_eHFzOsM1QKi43EU4j3SUmOTsC=XmhMFPqeAw@mail.gmail.com> <8C6BE511-2CCD-434F-BE72-43F350E8AA2C@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Do you think we should gate moving this singular hack to the Octeon
config file on breaking out a bunch of std.foo files now? :) I was
just saying that if you're advocating doing that work, we should do
some more generalized stuff, too. Like, std.pcidriversandwhatnot
should be machine-independent and would reduce a lot of maintenance
between architectures, that kind of thing. I don't think any of it
should gate moving INLINE_CFLAG_SOMETHING_FOO_WHATEVER_BISCUIT_* into
the Octeon kernel config and out of sys/conf.
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 6:34 PM, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote:
> I would too, but let's not gate a solution to this problem on that.
>
> Warner
>
> On Jul 21, 2013, at 3:29 PM, Juli Mallett wrote:
>
>> I would really like a std.pci or something, too, so we don't have to
>> enumerate all the PCI devices in every config.
>>
>> On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote:
>>> These should really be in the std.foo files for each specific subport. That way atheros could have one set, and octeon could have another.
>>>
>>> I do know that we don't do the std.foo thing for the atheros config files, but we really should start, and this would be a good place to start...
>>>
>>> Warner
>>>
>>> On Jul 21, 2013, at 12:54 PM, Juli Mallett wrote:
>>>
>>>> Making it possible to override each value would be ideal but
>>>> cumbersome. If you want to do that, by all means do!
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Juli.
>>>>
>>>> On 2013-07-21, at 11:44, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Juli/Warner,
>>>>>
>>>>> Is it possible to undo this particular hack, and allow these values to
>>>>> be overridden in the kernel config files?
>>>>>
>>>>> from kern.pre.mk
>>>>>
>>>>> CFLAGS= ${COPTFLAGS} ${C_DIALECT} ${DEBUG} ${CWARNFLAGS}
>>>>> CFLAGS+= ${INCLUDES} -D_KERNEL -DHAVE_KERNEL_OPTION_HEADERS -include
>>>>> opt_global.h
>>>>> .if ${COMPILER_TYPE} != "clang"
>>>>> CFLAGS+= -fno-common -finline-limit=${INLINE_LIMIT}
>>>>> .if ${MACHINE_CPUARCH} != "mips"
>>>>> CFLAGS+= --param inline-unit-growth=100
>>>>> CFLAGS+= --param large-function-growth=1000
>>>>> .else
>>>>> # XXX Actually a gross hack just for Octeon because of the Simple Executive.
>>>>> CFLAGS+= --param inline-unit-growth=10000
>>>>> CFLAGS+= --param large-function-growth=100000
>>>>> CFLAGS+= --param max-inline-insns-single=10000
>>>>> .endif
>>>>> .endif
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd like to be able to experiment with different inline settings in
>>>>> order to try and squeeze kernels down to be smaller.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -adrian
>>>
>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CACVs6=9mjoB7LQ4OkvT7CJ8b0cG_G9o9XJsAauqxUYwo7MFpkQ>