On Friday 07 September 2007 17:31, Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 18:07 +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> > A bit extended version:
> >
> > In the process in making it work I saw ~10% vmlinux size reductions
> > (which basically matches what Marcelo says) when I wasn't retaining
> > sections needed for EXPORT_SYMBOLs, but module loading didn't work.
> >
> > Thus I fixed that by adding KEEP() directives so that EXPORT_SYMBOLs
> > are never discarded. This was just one of many fixes until kernel
> > started to actually boot and work.
> >
> > I did that before I posted patches to lkml.
> > IOW: posted patches are not broken versus module loading.
>
> Ok, this is more like the explanation I was looking for..
>
> During this thread you seemed to indicate the patches you release
> reduced the kernel ~10% , but now your saying that was pre-release ,
> right?
CONFIG_MODULE=n will save ~10%
CONFIG_MODULE=y - ~1%
Exact figure depends on .config (whether you happen to include
especially "fat" code or not).
I want to explain a bit where I am coming from. I am working on busybox,
and last release made busybox smaller by "whopping" 2%. This is the result
of a hundred or so of small code and data shrinks.
It basically means that I am close to the point of diminishing returns
trying to make busybox smaller, and memory wastage on the running
embedded system is now elsewhere - including kernel.
--
vda
-
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]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
