On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 9:12 AM, Alexei Starovoitov <a...@plumgrid.com> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Andi Kleen <a...@firstfloor.org> wrote: >> "H. Peter Anvin" <h...@zytor.com> writes: >>> >>> Not to mention that in that case we might as well -- since we need a >>> compiler anyway -- generate the machine code in user space; the JIT >>> solution really only is useful if it can provide something that we can't >>> do otherwise, e.g. enable it in secure boot environments. >> >> I can see there may be some setups which don't have a compiler >> (e.g. I know some people don't use systemtap because of that) >> But this needs a custom gcc install too as far as I understand. > > fyi custom gcc is a single 13M binary. It doesn't depend on any > include files or any libraries. > and can be easily packaged together with perf... even for embedded > environment.
Hmm, 13M binary is big IMO, perf is just 5M after compiled in my system, I'm not sure embed a custom gcc into perf is a good idea. (and need to compile that custom gcc every time when build perf ?) IMO gcc size is not all/main reason of why embedded system didn't install it, I saw many many production embedded system, no one install gcc, also gdb, etc. I would never expect Android will install gcc in some day, I also will really surprise if telcom-vender deliver Linux board with gcc installed to customers. Another question is: does the custom gcc of bpf-filter need kernel header file for compilation? if it need, then this issue is more bigger than gcc size for embedded system.(same problem like Systemtap) Thanks, Jovi. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
