Can we undo the octeon hack?

[Warner Losh]

Yea, the only ugliness I see is that this gets pulled into the kernel modules as well...  But there the limits are smaller (and fixed for all architectures)...

Otherwise, I have most of a patch together that I'll post after a few kernels build.

Warner

On Jul 21, 2013, at 9:21 PM, Juli Mallett wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Warner Losh <imp at bsdimp.com> wrote:
>> 
>> On Jul 21, 2013, at 9:00 PM, Juli Mallett wrote:
>> 
>>> I know I shouldn't say this, but: How hard can it be? :P
>>> 
>>> In kern.pre.mk:
>>> 
>>> CFLAGS_PARAM_INLINE_UNIT_GROWTH?=100
>>> CFLAGS_PARAM_LARGE_FUNCTION_GROWTH?=1000
>>> CFLAGS_PARAM_MAX_INLINE_INSNS_SINGLE?=/* XXX what is default? */
>>> CFLAGS+= --param inline-unit-growth=${CFLAGS_PARAM_INLINE_UNIT_GROWTH}
>>> CFLAGS+= --param large-function-growth=${CFLAGS_PARAM_LARGE_FUNCTION_GROWTH}
>>> CFLAGS+= --param max-inline-insns-single=${CFLAGS_PARAM_MAX_INLINE_INSNS_SINGLE}
>>> 
>>> And then in the Octeon config:
>>> 
>>> makeoptions CFLAGS_PARAM_INLINE_UNIT_GROWTH=10000
>>> makeoptions CFLAGS_PARAM_LARGE_FUNCTION_GROWTH=100000
>>> makeoptions CFLAGS_PARAM_MAX_INLINE_INSNS_SINGLE=10000
>>> 
>>> Right?
>>> 
>>> Come up with a better name scheme, win 1/20 of 1 US cent.  (Not
>>> redeemable for cash.)
>>> 
>>> Most users will never see it; only Octeon needs such behaviour because
>>> of how the Simple Executive is implemented.
>> 
>> We're better off than I thought. We can put those in std.octeon1.
>> 
>> Not sure I like having those names, but 1/20 of a cent isn't worth the time it takes to type them...
> 
> Long names discourage Gentooish funroll-loopsing! It's a feature!
> These are not user-serviceable parts.  Hell, even I can't really
> service this stuff effectively.  Having to set them at all is a bug.