From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from phobos.denx.de (phobos.denx.de [85.214.62.61]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EDA4FC54E64 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 2024 10:29:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from h2850616.stratoserver.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 738B388139; Thu, 28 Mar 2024 11:29:11 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=denx.de Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=denx.de; s=phobos-20191101; t=1711621751; bh=lNkefTuYRODQ5aFW0vfVv5T7PLQxDtewkuCr93YYMUM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From; b=aBksYnMuyR2bxpSU4+R9MRKPRpXsk8qg/bLNTOlEQE1Qj6QkWjEdzqKbnmz6VMRjE ofbfgKmMHsylzJR4AXh2yW8xInQ34bxfDjaLOMZN4s3w8UJxvM2yJcPqc51YOWIODm 1WwB9D5me2RtGydZ/y/y6ZjwOR1XT3FlvTltGo+MJgkhIsxSixNudDI3wtO6JSBG9a 4OC+JW5PwEnDcDJwQe8/OxBxxLsnzrXfspQAKzrcnsUMxjv+lyuLdHJA5Vw390U9ff Tf5Yo1GBLDq1vJGdXc3u90M23PFa92yEap/cmUzxq/SzagL8EBYQLU2rkCCgGSGKEI VfsTvOT+wnnGg== Received: from wsk (85-222-111-42.dynamic.chello.pl [85.222.111.42]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: lukma@denx.de) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E8F3B88125; Thu, 28 Mar 2024 11:29:09 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=denx.de; s=phobos-20191101; t=1711621750; bh=lNkefTuYRODQ5aFW0vfVv5T7PLQxDtewkuCr93YYMUM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=vp78VPo7G2tDEAZVaTPbmC+AIKDgBDxQP46iIGpBY9U+Ef+Ob1ibp8b1NOdco2NXA 3bXAv4q1Yp5ICPry+QBarJmHwzjhEYTY8WaLDn3HxDulMJZ2QDYAKtTGJE+ZVR9XgP lpc2SuX733dDPp8/fVLURQ4pPVD8KyieE+SI6vw0iarNxWXyF/aiKDZhYl2iS/tjYF mMhHUVuRVrQzy3YPo5fxavG3di5XJfuzGyQV/UIOePgJxTn/4jswM4K/MJcGPMEdNS XpX4+DueGpkSVte6l3MwIVdkLsxitS5CuOATQeLfjUDPQmnzLPqhtssaqFhYBwTInR P18pssNds/iYg== Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2024 11:29:04 +0100 From: Lukasz Majewski To: Marek Vasut Cc: Tom Rini , u-boot@lists.denx.de, Simon Glass , Stefano Babic , Fabio Estevam Subject: Re: Thoughts about U-boot binary size increase Message-ID: <20240328112904.19f39d66@wsk> In-Reply-To: <343af186-17b5-4945-ac76-9bd4527f1da7@denx.de> References: <20240328102049.10108d5b@wsk> <343af186-17b5-4945-ac76-9bd4527f1da7@denx.de> Organization: denx.de X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.19.0 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_/Iaq_x1ATbJC29VCejDC9GnC"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 X-BeenThere: u-boot@lists.denx.de X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39 Precedence: list List-Id: U-Boot discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Sender: "U-Boot" X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.103.8 at phobos.denx.de X-Virus-Status: Clean --Sig_/Iaq_x1ATbJC29VCejDC9GnC Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Marek, > On 3/28/24 10:20 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote: > > Dear Community, > >=20 > > I'd like to share with you some thoughts about growth of u-boot's > > binary size for SPL and u-boot proper. > >=20 > > Board: XEA > > SoC : imx287 (still in active production) > > Problem: SPL size constrained to ~55 KiB (This cannot be exceeded). > > Board design constraints u-boot proper size to less than > > ~448 KiB > >=20 > >=20 > > When XEA was added (2019.07): > > - u-boot.sb (SPL): 37 KiB > > - u-boot.img : 401 KiB > >=20 > > Now (2024.04): > > - u-boot.sb (SPL): 40 KiB =20 >=20 > Do you know which symbol(s) grew in here ? I will need to check it. >=20 > > - u-boot.img : 427 KiB > >=20 > > (With a _lot_ of effort put to reduce the size) > >=20 > > Hence, the question - would it be possible to take more concern > > about the binary size growth? > >=20 > > Maybe CI could catch patches, which enable by default some features > > and the size is unintentionally increased? =20 >=20 > Try and set CONFIG_BOARD_SIZE_LIMIT and CONFIG_SPL_SIZE_LIMIT for > this board, that would trip build error if the size grows too large. I think that setting CONFIG_BOARD_SIZE_LIMIT and CONFIG_SPL_SIZE_LIMIT would help for rising the "red flag" of the size limit. However, I would like to signal that there is a problem with u-boot size increase. Best regards, Lukasz Majewski -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, Managing Director: Erika Unter HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-59 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: lukma@denx.de --Sig_/Iaq_x1ATbJC29VCejDC9GnC Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEgAyFJ+N6uu6+XupJAR8vZIA0zr0FAmYFRnAACgkQAR8vZIA0 zr1gIwf+O6k+Q6AzK/4+V0rioK3YBVng/SBTez3aKTwnCXQG5hiJ97h/HdsbQpD/ VYmCgLRspG7ZnMXg2McWfffYm/2NLZgd9tjrgBZhQqfEOcmR6iW7ZA68XA1xp+xr IVtL/4aBkIjkZosE69TAHrwFemxBb5Yfp/9Bv+ptRDuJfIJAsbQOnK7AfhNQMdZR h7fJi9xih6ENtUDxYGediaYY+E2WLAa27Lh28TC/7UawllQpX71fq/baYZ/JBnSi +050BXUQfsQw0xXQ019auzFCA5MIkt+OhBbVquPVedgC/fURcCNLGpiPE+P3fTaD zCmF8wmPjooLqGKzOkh4eaqOejuMuA== =yplv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/Iaq_x1ATbJC29VCejDC9GnC--