[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081025162116.GA13303@uranus.ravnborg.org>
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2008 18:21:16 +0200
From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Cc: torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>
Subject: Re: [pull request] getting rid of __cpuinit
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 08:06:38AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Oct 2008 16:35:28 +0200
> Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org> wrote:
> > So if you look at the size of the cpuinit/exit sections in the
> > before case you get the real space saving that is lost in the
> > embedded case after your patch is applied.
> > The space savings that happen after early init.
>
> [linux.trees.git]# objdump -h vmlinux.before | grep init.text
> 25 .init.text 00037c25 ffffffff8152a000 000000000152a000 0092a000
> [inux.trees.git]# objdump -h vmlinux.after | grep init.text
> 25 .init.text 000316c2 ffffffff81542000 0000000001542000 00942000
So with your config we will loose a saving of 25955 bytes
of text.
I tried to look a the numbers of a defconfig build here.
cpuinit.text equals 0x5d97 = 23959
cpuinit.data equals 0x3574 = 13684
[objdump of vmlinux.o gives you the size of the cpuinit sections]
So if we decide to drop cpuinit then it should be based on the
above figure and not the 2k figure you gave in the original mail.
Or even better we should see the difference with a typical
embedded configuration and not some big defconfig build.
I will assume the saving is less on a typical embedded
configuration.
Sam
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists