optimized script [Was: ARM defconfig files]
in [Kernel]
|
Prev: [PATCH 2/2] blkdev: check for valid request queue before issuing flush
Next: [PATCH][RT] futex: protect against pi_blocked_on corruption during requeue PI
From: Uwe Kleine-König on 13 Jul 2010 04:10 Hello, On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 09:07:41AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-K�nig wrote: > Hi > > On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 01:50:47PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 1:34 PM, Linus Torvalds > > <torvalds(a)linux-foundation.org> wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 12:17 PM, Nicolas Pitre <nico(a)fluxnic.net> wrote: > > >> I think Uwe could provide his script and add it to the kernel tree. > > >> Then all architectures could benefit from it. �Having the defconfig > > >> files contain only those options which are different from the defaults > > >> is certainly more readable, even on x86. > > > > > > Quite possible. But maintainers would need to be on the lookout of > > > people actually using the script, and refusing to apply patches that > > > re-introduce the whole big thing. > > > > I can (partially) speak for powerpc. If ARM uses this approach, then > > I think we can do the same. After the defconfigs are trimmed, I > > certainly won't pick up any more full defconfigs. > I just restarted my script on the powerpc defconfigs basing on rc5, I > assume they complete in a few days time. So Stephen was faster than me. I don't know yet how he optimised my script, meanwhile I put some efforts into it, too by just checking lines that match "^(# )?CONFIG_". Find it attached. I will start to reduce the remaining configs (i.e. all but arm and powerpc). Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-K�nig | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
From: Olof Johansson on 13 Jul 2010 14:20 On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 10:07:05AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-K�nig wrote: > Hello, > > On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 09:07:41AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-K�nig wrote: > > Hi > > > > On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 01:50:47PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 1:34 PM, Linus Torvalds > > > <torvalds(a)linux-foundation.org> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 12:17 PM, Nicolas Pitre <nico(a)fluxnic.net> wrote: > > > >> I think Uwe could provide his script and add it to the kernel tree. > > > >> Then all architectures could benefit from it. �Having the defconfig > > > >> files contain only those options which are different from the defaults > > > >> is certainly more readable, even on x86. > > > > > > > > Quite possible. But maintainers would need to be on the lookout of > > > > people actually using the script, and refusing to apply patches that > > > > re-introduce the whole big thing. > > > > > > I can (partially) speak for powerpc. If ARM uses this approach, then > > > I think we can do the same. After the defconfigs are trimmed, I > > > certainly won't pick up any more full defconfigs. > > I just restarted my script on the powerpc defconfigs basing on rc5, I > > assume they complete in a few days time. > So Stephen was faster than me. I don't know yet how he optimised my > script, meanwhile I put some efforts into it, too by just checking lines > that match "^(# )?CONFIG_". > > Find it attached. > > I will start to reduce the remaining configs (i.e. all but arm and > powerpc). I added just a simple heuristic: If I could remove a line, I attempted to remove twice the amount next time around (and fall back to 1 if it failed). I.e. main loop: i = 0 lines = 1 while i < len(config): print 'test for %r + %d' % (config[i], lines) defconfig = open(defconfig_src, 'w') defconfig.writelines(config[:i]) defconfig.writelines(config[i + lines:]) defconfig.close() subprocess.check_call(['make', '-s', 'ARCH=%s' % arch, target]) if os.stat('.config').st_size == config_size and list(open('.config')) == origconfig: del config[i:i+lines] lines *= 2 else: if lines > 1: lines = 1 else: i += 1 I didn't measure what the actual improvement was, but I saw a fair amount of 2/4/8-attempts passing, so I let it run. Stephen beat me to posting the resulting patch though. :P While this script is great, it is somewhat painful to run given that it attempts one config per line. Even on a fast machine that tends to take a while. -Olof -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Nicolas Pitre on 13 Jul 2010 19:40
On Tue, 13 Jul 2010, Olof Johansson wrote: > On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 10:07:05AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-K�nig wrote: > > Hello, > > > > On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 09:07:41AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-K�nig wrote: > > > Hi > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 01:50:47PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 1:34 PM, Linus Torvalds > > > > <torvalds(a)linux-foundation.org> wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 12:17 PM, Nicolas Pitre <nico(a)fluxnic.net> wrote: > > > > >> I think Uwe could provide his script and add it to the kernel tree. > > > > >> Then all architectures could benefit from it. �Having the defconfig > > > > >> files contain only those options which are different from the defaults > > > > >> is certainly more readable, even on x86. > > > > > > > > > > Quite possible. But maintainers would need to be on the lookout of > > > > > people actually using the script, and refusing to apply patches that > > > > > re-introduce the whole big thing. > > > > > > > > I can (partially) speak for powerpc. If ARM uses this approach, then > > > > I think we can do the same. After the defconfigs are trimmed, I > > > > certainly won't pick up any more full defconfigs. > > > I just restarted my script on the powerpc defconfigs basing on rc5, I > > > assume they complete in a few days time. > > So Stephen was faster than me. I don't know yet how he optimised my > > script, meanwhile I put some efforts into it, too by just checking lines > > that match "^(# )?CONFIG_". > > > > Find it attached. > > > > I will start to reduce the remaining configs (i.e. all but arm and > > powerpc). > > I added just a simple heuristic: If I could remove a line, I attempted > to remove twice the amount next time around (and fall back to 1 if it failed). > [...] > > While this script is great, it is somewhat painful to run given that it > attempts one config per line. Even on a fast machine that tends to take > a while. The optimal solution is to add that .config reduction ability straight into the Kconfig parser (scripts/kconfig/*). There you can find out right away what are the non default state for each config option without actually trying them out one by one. Nicolas |