On Mon, 14 Apr 2014 14:52:16 +0200 Jiri Slaby wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

On 04/10/2014 07:45 PM, Jeff Mahoney wrote:

...

Hi all -

Over the past several years, the tracing infrastructure has improved to the point that it incurs very little runtime overhead. The attached patchset migrates the useful options from the -trace configs to all of the other configs and ultimately removes the trace flavor entirely. This saves space for the kernel RPMs as well as conserves build resources.

Hi,

on the other hand, I just wanted to point out, that DYN_FTRACE generates 22 bytes of nops on s390 (in comparison to 5 bytes on x86_64) in every function which actually can impact performance. But we don't care about s390 in openSUSE much, right? (We are to measure this on SLE yet.)

Is there an s390(x) port of openSUSE? I mean, the OBS build farm certainly does not include any z/Series hosts... Since the internal Factory builds are not public (AFAIK), someone else would have to re-compile the openSUSE sources. I'm not aware of anyone actually doing that. If that's the case, then the openSUSE community does not care about mainframe at all. Petr T

Hi, On Mon, 14 Apr 2014, Jiri Slaby wrote:

...

I'm not aware of anyone actually doing that. If that's the case, then the openSUSE community does not care about mainframe at all.

It well might be the case. But what is the reason to have s390 configs in the master branch?

To have it build internally in Factory:Head so that s390x lurkers in the company can take a look? Ciao, Michael. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org

Hi, On Mon, 14 Apr 2014, Jiri Slaby wrote:

...

...

It well might be the case. But what is the reason to have s390 configs in the master branch?

To have it build internally in Factory:Head so that s390x lurkers in the company can take a look?

But who and what's the reason? Does it boot at all? And if not, who cares? IOW what's the use case?

I don't know. Ask the s390 and the autobuild guys if they actively do something with Factory:Head for s390x. But in any case, in the future it will be necessary to have a built kernel to build anything at all for an architecture (as it will be used in the build VM, so that would be one use case), and we certainly do not want to disable s390x for Factory:Head internally altogether. Ciao, Michael. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org

At Mon, 14 Apr 2014 15:24:03 +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:

On 04/14/2014 03:05 PM, Michael Matz wrote:

...

Hi,

On Mon, 14 Apr 2014, Jiri Slaby wrote:

...

...

I'm not aware of anyone actually doing that. If that's the case, then the openSUSE community does not care about mainframe at all.

It well might be the case. But what is the reason to have s390 configs in the master branch?

To have it build internally in Factory:Head so that s390x lurkers in the company can take a look?

But who and what's the reason? Does it boot at all? And if not, who cares? IOW what's the use case?

We've been checking the build errors, at least, no? Takashi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org

Le Monday 14 April 2014 à 14:59 +0200, Petr Tesarik a écrit :

On Mon, 14 Apr 2014 14:52:16 +0200 Jiri Slaby wrote:

...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

On 04/10/2014 07:45 PM, Jeff Mahoney wrote:

...

Hi all -

Over the past several years, the tracing infrastructure has improved to the point that it incurs very little runtime overhead. The attached patchset migrates the useful options from the -trace configs to all of the other configs and ultimately removes the trace flavor entirely. This saves space for the kernel RPMs as well as conserves build resources.

Hi,

on the other hand, I just wanted to point out, that DYN_FTRACE generates 22 bytes of nops on s390 (in comparison to 5 bytes on x86_64) in every function which actually can impact performance. But we don't care about s390 in openSUSE much, right? (We are to measure this on SLE yet.)

That shouldn't prevent us from removing the trace flavor on other architectures. I'm all for it - fewer flavors has many benefits.

Is there an s390(x) port of openSUSE? I mean, the OBS build farm certainly does not include any z/Series hosts... Since the internal Factory builds are not public (AFAIK), someone else would have to re-compile the openSUSE sources.

I'm not aware of anyone actually doing that. If that's the case, then the openSUSE community does not care about mainframe at all.

Correct. To be honest I don't quite understand why we keep such configuration files in the master kernel branch to start with. They are pointless for openSUSE, and when we start a new SLE product, there's still a lot of work left because these files are half-maintained and all the changes done in the previous SLE's service packs has to take precedence. Having a single ancestor would make things less error-prone IMHO. Even for architectures which are shared between openSUSE and SLE, the kernel configuration files start diverging by quite a bit, as the target hardware set and use cases aren't the same. So maybe it would be time to admit that the openSUSE kernel flavors and SLE kernel flavors are separate entities and should be handled separately. -- Jean Delvare SUSE L3 Support -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org