Chris Wedgwood <cw@f00f.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 03:41:05PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > Daniel Egger <degger@fhm.edu> wrote:
>
> > > I've seen surprisingly few messages about the dramatic size
> > > increase between a simple 2.4 and a 2.5 kernel image.
>
> > 2.4 has magical size reduction tricks in it which were not brought
> > into 2.5 because we expect that gcc will do it for us.
>
> I can't see it helping *that* much, for me I have:
>
> charon:~/wk/linux% size 2.4.x-cw/vmlinux bk-2.5.x/vmlinux
> text data bss dec hex filename
> 2003887 120260 191657 2315804 23561c 2.4.x-cw/vmlinux
> 2411323 267551 181004 2859878 2ba366 bk-2.5.x/vmlinux
>
> gcc version 2.95.4 20011002 (Debian prerelease)
>
> this is for functionally (in terms of .config) equivalent kernels.
>
Don't know what your point is here, really.
2.4 has hacks to make it smaller. iirc they were worth ~200 kbytes, or
around 10%.
gcc-3.x string sharing was supposed to make those hacks unnecesary. However
a quick test here shows gcc-3.2.1 generating a 10% larger 2.5 image than
gcc-2.95.3, so a club may need to be taken to 2.5 as well.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 07 2003 - 22:00:26 EST