From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: T Ziomek Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 14:16:27 -0500 Subject: [U-Boot] [RFC][PATCH] Update malloc to dlmalloc version 2.8.4 In-Reply-To: <200907071434.33729.vapier@gentoo.org> References: <1246984027-8136-1-git-send-email-galak@kernel.crashing.org> <200907071434.33729.vapier@gentoo.org> Message-ID: <20090707191627.GE3979@email.mot.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 02:34:32PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Tuesday 07 July 2009 12:30:18 Kumar Gala wrote: > > Here are some size #'s > > > > [galak at blarg u-boot-85xx]$ size u-boot > > text data bss dec hex filename > > 392040 50536 41957 484533 764b5 u-boot > > 397660 49500 42397 489557 77855 u-boot (new dlmalloc) > > > > [galak at blarg u-boot-85xx]$ size common/dlmalloc.o > > text data bss dec hex filename > > 4768 1056 56 5880 16f8 common/dlmalloc.o > > 10390 16 492 10898 2a92 common/dlmalloc.o (new > > dlmalloc) > > to say it has increased is an understatement. i cant imagine the upstream > code increasing that much. perhaps we had trimmed/customized the > implementation so as to shrink it ? > > > old dlmalloc: > > [galak at blarg u-boot-85xx]$ nm --size-sort common/dlmalloc.o > > use the bloatcheck script to do a human readable compare between the two > objects. you can find it in the linux kernel. And/or, 'pahole' (Poke-a-hole) or some of the other "7 Dwarves" tools might help shed light on the differences. LWN article (how I heard about them) GIT OLS '07 paper or Tom -- It is of fundamental importance to understand | that the primary recipient of your source code | Email to 'CTZ001' is not the compiler but your coworkers. | at 'email.mot.com' -- KreaTV SW Dev Guidelines |