Re: Thoughts about U-boot binary size increase

Lukasz Majewski
2024-03-28T10:29:12Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1629 bytes --]

Hi Marek,

> On 3/28/24 10:20 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> > Dear Community,
> >
> > I'd like to share with you some thoughts about growth of u-boot's
> > binary size for SPL and u-boot proper.
> >
> > 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
> >
> >
> > When XEA was added (2019.07):
> > - u-boot.sb (SPL): 37 KiB
> > - u-boot.img : 401 KiB
> >
> > Now (2024.04):
> > - u-boot.sb (SPL): 40 KiB
>
> Do you know which symbol(s) grew in here ?

I will need to check it.

>
> > - u-boot.img : 427 KiB
> >
> > (With a _lot_ of effort put to reduce the size)
> >
> > Hence, the question - would it be possible to take more concern
> > about the binary size growth?
> >
> > Maybe CI could catch patches, which enable by default some features
> > and the size is unintentionally increased?
>
> 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.