From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tomasz Figa Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] ARM: EXYNOS: Consolidate Kconfig entries Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2014 17:33:16 +0100 Message-ID: <52F50ACC.3020105@samsung.com> References: <1391687996-26011-1-git-send-email-sachin.kamat@linaro.org> <5101685.tPb8PWOH5Q@amdc1032> <7214831.iPsDTEq8CU@amdc1032> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mailout4.w1.samsung.com ([210.118.77.14]:47926 "EHLO mailout4.w1.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750782AbaBGQdV (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Feb 2014 11:33:21 -0500 Received: from eucpsbgm1.samsung.com (unknown [203.254.199.244]) by mailout4.w1.samsung.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-24.01(7.0.4.24.0) 64bit (built Nov 17 2011)) with ESMTP id <0N0M00EVAWNK3G30@mailout4.w1.samsung.com> for linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 16:33:20 +0000 (GMT) In-reply-to: Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org To: Olof Johansson , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Cc: Sachin Kamat , "linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org" , Kukjin Kim On 06.02.2014 19:59, Olof Johansson wrote: > On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz > wrote: > >>>> Well, once again, seeing some numbers would be good. :) >>> >>> What numbers do you want? Size comparisons with all SoC options on vs only one? >> >> Yes, size comparisions with all SoCs (for given family) turned on vs >> only one turned on (done on kernel without this patch applied). >> >> Also size comparisons for ARCH_EXYNOS4 and ARCH_EXYNOS5 both turned >> on vs only ARCH_EXYNOS4 or ARCH_EXYNOS5 turned on (with this patch >> applied). > > exynos_defconfig-based build data below. > > text data bss dec hex filename > 5109986 319952 270196 5700134 56fa26 obj-tmp/vmlinux # all 4+5 SoCs enabled > 5088312 296912 270196 5655420 564b7c obj-tmp/vmlinux # EXYNOS5 > off, all EXYNOS4 SoCs enabled > 5088032 296896 270196 5655124 564a54 obj-tmp/vmlinux # Only 4210 enabled > 5079205 299928 270068 5649201 563331 obj-tmp/vmlinux # EXYNOS4 > off, all EXYNOS5 SoCs enabled > 5063355 286792 270068 5620215 55c1f7 obj-tmp/vmlinux # Only 5250 enabled > 5067815 298152 270068 5636035 55ffc3 obj-tmp/vmlinux # Only > 5250+5420 enabled > 5053357 278480 269364 5601201 5577b1 obj-tmp/vmlinux # Only 5440 enabled > > The main difference of disabling 5440 is that it removed the PCI > support, which explains that reduction in size. > > So, I would argue that theere might be some value in disabling whole > families (since it saves about 20k of text and the same of data), but > that there's less gain per SoC member. 5440 is an oddball in this > setup so it might make sense to treat it differently due to the PCI > aspect. Well, the numbers basically represent what I expected. Thanks for checking this. So I second this patch even more now, but maybe let's change it a bit and introduce third entry for Exynos5440, since it doesn't really belong to either of ARCHs. Candidates that come to my mind are ARCH_EXYNOS5440 (seems to specific) or ARCH_EXYNOS5_SERVER. Feel free to suggest anything better, though. Best regards, Tomasz