Re: Calling testers for another Dead Function Optimisation update

From: Dan Malek (
Date: Sun May 14 2000 - 13:13:11 EST

Graham Stoney wrote:

> I've made yet another update to my dead function optimisation

Has anyone looked at this????

This is the way the kernel used to be, with the kernel objects
as *.a files instead of *.o files. I remember a discussion on
some mailing lists when things changed from *.a to *.o, and I
asked why it had changed. The response I received was the change
was due to loadable modules, that when you link the kernel as a
bunch of *.a files the result is usually missing lots of functions
that a loadable module may want to call. I was told to trim down
the size of my embedded kernel by using configuration options
(and loadable modules) rather than selective loading of functions
by 'ld'.

> .... and is particularly handy for emdedded systems people.

Yes, but I lost that argument long ago, and am trying to find
ways to work with the "new" method.

> I think/hope we're getting close to something that could be accepted into the
> official kernel now.

Who gave you that indication? I wouldn't even try to check any of
this into the kernel sources based upon past discussions.

        -- Dan

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon May 15 2000 - 21:00:29 EST