Re: [PATCH 0/3] build system: section garbage collection for vmlinux

[Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>]

On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 10:34:38PM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 07:46:11PM +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> > On Wednesday 05 September 2007 16:53, Oleg Verych wrote:
> > > * Wed, 5 Sep 2007 14:43:21 +0100
> > > * User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1
> > > >
> > > > Build system: section garbage collection for vmlinux
> > > 
> > > Maybe this is just a test suit to get finish with `make XYZ static`?
> > 
> > They are vaguely connected in a sense that unused function which is
> > not marked static doesn't generate gcc warning, but will be discarded
> > by --gc-sections. "make XYZ static" also tends to find them - you make
> > function static, you recompile the file, and gcc informs you that
> > the function is not used at all!
> > 
> > This happened to me when I did aic7xxx patches.
> > 
> > You may yse --print-gc-sections to see the list of discarded sections.
> 
> Anyway, this is gccism/binutilizm. That about other possible/future
> options?

The kernel requires GNU gcc and GNU binutils, and if you want to use 
other tools for building the kernel they have to be sufficiently 
compatible.

> Give me example, please, why function must be non static if not used.

s/not used/not used in this kernel configuration/

> If usage requires kconfig tuning, then this is a better way to go, than
> to adopt yet another GNU/Luxury.

The alternative would be to use an unmaintainable amount of #ifdef's.

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed