diff options
| author | Sitsofe Wheeler <sitsofe@yahoo.com> | 2008-10-11 20:27:53 +0100 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> | 2008-10-23 18:59:31 +0200 |
| commit | 63fb70859f987f2b3b8028fa467fd63336315e9c (patch) | |
| tree | d471c4cda93d1859180ea7fd61b7063286a2a9a7 /arch/x86/Kconfig.debug | |
| parent | a9b6148d25f15ddfe9d7a7f3e526fdb64e7cf7da (diff) | |
| download | kernel_goldelico_gta04-63fb70859f987f2b3b8028fa467fd63336315e9c.zip kernel_goldelico_gta04-63fb70859f987f2b3b8028fa467fd63336315e9c.tar.gz kernel_goldelico_gta04-63fb70859f987f2b3b8028fa467fd63336315e9c.tar.bz2 | |
x86: change OPTIMIZE_INLINING help to say enabling makes smaller kernels
Impact: clarify Kconfig help text
The OPTIMIZE_INLINING help currently says "The gcc 4.x series have a
rewritten inlining algorithm and disabling this option will generate a
smaller kernel there."
This contradicts other parts of the help text and my own tests:
5463127 2008-10-11 19:51 vmlinux.no-opt
5456152 2008-10-11 19:56 vmlinux.opt
Reword text to say that enabling OPTIMIZE_INLINING will lead to smaller
kernels with gcc 4.x or later.
Signed-off-by: Sitsofe Wheeler <sitsofe@yahoo.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Diffstat (limited to 'arch/x86/Kconfig.debug')
| -rw-r--r-- | arch/x86/Kconfig.debug | 8 |
1 files changed, 4 insertions, 4 deletions
diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig.debug b/arch/x86/Kconfig.debug index 2a3dfbd..2be1e6b 100644 --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig.debug +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig.debug @@ -307,10 +307,10 @@ config OPTIMIZE_INLINING developers have marked 'inline'. Doing so takes away freedom from gcc to do what it thinks is best, which is desirable for the gcc 3.x series of compilers. The gcc 4.x series have a rewritten inlining algorithm and - disabling this option will generate a smaller kernel there. Hopefully - this algorithm is so good that allowing gcc4 to make the decision can - become the default in the future, until then this option is there to - test gcc for this. + enabling this option will generate a smaller kernel there. Hopefully + this algorithm is so good that allowing gcc 4.x and above to make the + decision will become the default in the future. Until then this option + is there to test gcc for this. If unsure, say N. |