On Thu, 2006-04-13 at 11:38 +0300, Denis Vlasenko wrote:
> On Thursday 13 April 2006 04:24, Dave Dillow wrote:
> > Regardless, I remain opposed to this particular instance of bloat
> > busting. While both patches have improved in style, they remove a useful
> > feature and make the code less clean, for no net gain.
> What happened to non-modular build? "no net gain" is not true.
Ok, so you saved what, 200 bytes? On a few drivers that may save you a
small amount -- you basically said you had to have everything loaded to
Weren't most of those savings from moving a big function out-of-line?
The part I agree with?
> > > This kind of changes are important, because bloat creeps in byte by byte
> > > of unused features. So I really appreciate your work here Denis.
> > On SMP FC4, typhoon.ko has a text size of 68330, so you need to cut 2794
> > bytes to see an actual difference in memory usage for a module. Non-SMP
> > it is 67741, so there you only need to cut 2205 bytes to get a win.
> This is silly. Should I go this route and try a dozen of different gcc
> versions and "-O2 versus -Os" things to demonstrate that sometimes
> it will matter?
Quit being dense. No one has said that there are cases will it make a
difference, just that that case is far removed from the usual case.
I think I'm done on this topic. You've got more important people to
convince than me, and they've already clear stated their position.
Dave Dillow <[email protected]>
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]