Can we undo the octeon hack?

[Juli Mallett]

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 at 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 at 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
>