Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 12 Nov 2012 19:26:30 -0700
From:      Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>
To:        Erik Cederstrand <erik@cederstrand.dk>
Cc:        "toolchain@freebsd.org" <toolchain@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: arflags cleanup
Message-ID:  <0693B91A-6320-4CE9-A6FA-821B290BB74C@bsdimp.com>
In-Reply-To: <C331C11B-EC33-4E1E-9772-269077695334@cederstrand.dk>
References:  <3D0FBCC4-743C-45B0-82E0-4C82501F7E60@cederstrand.dk> <A5F62693-7817-4A99-8D45-DC3CE1FAD83B@bsdimp.com> <E8A733AD-56DE-4FFA-8BA4-BE56D2052BDD@cederstrand.dk> <C331C11B-EC33-4E1E-9772-269077695334@cederstrand.dk>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Nov 12, 2012, at 12:53 AM, Erik Cederstrand wrote:

> Den 09/11/2012 kl. 16.22 skrev Erik Cederstrand <erik@cederstrand.dk>:
>=20
>> Den 09/11/2012 kl. 15.36 skrev Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>:
>>=20
>>> On Nov 9, 2012, at 3:52 AM, Erik Cederstrand wrote:
>>>=20
>>>> Hello toolchainers,
>>>>=20
>>>> I'm attempting to clean up hardcoded ar(1) flags in the tree to use =
the global ARFLAGS in share/mk/sys.mk instead. I want to be able to add =
"-D" to ARFLAGS and have it used everywhere.
>>>>=20
>>>> The patch changes some hardcoded flags from e.g. "cru" to the =
default "rl" or "rv" from sys.mk. Looking at the manpage for ar(1), I'm =
pretty sure this is safe, and my runtime tests haven't turned out any =
problems. Loosing the "u" flags means loosing a bit in performance in =
theory, but I have tested this to be negligible in a buildworld / kernel =
run. In a later iteration, maybe the default flags can be added a "u".
>>>>=20
>>>> Are there any problems with this patch?
>>>=20
>>> I don't like losing the 'c' flag.  Makes things in the build too =
whiny.
>>> Why purposely lose the 'u' flag that you know helps performance?
>>> Why move from cq to rl? This can be a big slow down...
>>=20
>> I'd actually like to add both 'u' and 'c', I just didn't want to both =
clean up and change the default in the same patch. A followup patch =
could be:
>=20
> If there are no other objections, I'll try to both patches into the =
tree (I have no commit bit myself).

You haven't answered my objections, so not yet.  I haven't had a chance =
to see if this message actually answers my concerns though (my life has =
been busy).

Warner=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?0693B91A-6320-4CE9-A6FA-821B290BB74C>