On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 06:47:27AM -0800, Nakajima, Jun wrote:
> I don't think people need to use PGO for day-to-day development or
> debugging. Rather, it would be used only for systems deployed for actual
> use. For example, various kernel binaries optimized for particular use, such
> as database, web server, file server, embedded systems, etc, can be
> distributed as RPM (with profile feedback data).
But unless these kernels are 100% bug free it still leaves the mainteance
issues open.
Also is it really that big a win ?
>
> For development we should such profile feedback data to optimize the kernel
> in source code level (i.e by hand). I don't know the data in gcc has any
> clue for that.
likely/unlikely is the clue. In fact it is already overused.
-Andi
P.S.: Your original mail mentioned that the "P4P kernel was instable
with gcc32". Could you elaborate on the instability? We're using
kernels compiled with gcc 3.2 all the time and they work just fine.
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 31 2002 - 22:00:36 EST