From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Cc: torvalds@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Move sysctl check into debugging section and don't make it default y
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 19:17:34 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m1zln5lrnl.fsf@frodo.ebiederm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080822015718.GC23334@one.firstfloor.org> (Andi Kleen's message of "Fri, 22 Aug 2008 03:57:18 +0200")
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> writes:
> On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 11:15:37AM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> writes:
>>
>> >> What is a feature change like this doing coming in after the
>> >> merge window?
>> >
>> > I considered it a "anti bloat bugfix". Adding 30k of
>> > object code to allno was a bit too much.
>>
>> 30k??? Which platform are you testing on ia64????
>>
>> On x86_64 it is 8k text and 8k data.
>
> x86-64 with 4.1. See the size output in the original commit.
>
> text data bss dec hex filename
> 36243 0 0 36243 8d93 kernel/sysctl_check.o
>
> 36k actually.
With gcc-4.1.1 on x86_64 I see:
size kernel/sysctl.o
text data bss dec hex filename
9133 8948 208 18289 4771 kernel/sysctl.o
And looking at the readelf output confirms that size isn't missing something
important. That is extremely weird that you are seeing something so much different.
It does appear that I have CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE=y but I am surprised that
even that would make such a difference. Has gcc decided just to way over-optimize
that code?
Eric
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-08-22 2:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-08-16 5:53 [PATCH] Move sysctl check into debugging section and don't make it default y Andi Kleen
2008-08-21 6:14 ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-08-21 6:40 ` Andi Kleen
2008-08-21 8:14 ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-08-21 18:15 ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-08-22 1:57 ` Andi Kleen
2008-08-22 2:17 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m1zln5lrnl.fsf@frodo.ebiederm.org \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox