[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAFrQcG_znedMpcvXQkcDZ96ti66y9H8AEfcqVjgnZMwW1ViRdg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 14:17:20 -0700
From: Siqi Lin <siqilin@...gle.com>
To: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, Wei Wang <wvw@...gle.com>,
Gopinath Elanchezhian <gelanchezhian@...gle.com>,
spentyala@...gle.com, Rahul Chaudhry <rahulchaudhry@...gle.com>,
Stephen Hines <srhines@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: prevent regressions in compressed kernel image
size when upgrading to binutils 2.27
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Nick Desaulniers
<ndesaulniers@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> + folks in Suggested-by/Reported by lines, since git send-email seems
> to only pull in folks on Signed-off-by line :(
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/10/26/590
I'm OK with sticking with the <2.27 binutils behavior. The gzip data is:
binutils 2.25:
Image 41467904
Image.gz 13395151
binutils 2.27:
Image 41467392
Image.gz 14114953
gzipped kernel increased by 0.69 MiB.
The one special case I see is !CONFIG_RELOCATABLE and compression is
used, where there's a tradeoff between compressed image size and the
benefit of dynamic relocs.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists