[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YUi2kQqNVLSeA87X@pendragon.ideasonboard.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 19:28:01 +0300
From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>
Cc: Hyun Kwon <hyun.kwon@...inx.com>, Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
Sanjay R Mehta <sanju.mehta@....com>,
Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Jianqiang Chen <jianqiang.chen@...inx.com>,
Quanyang Wang <quanyang.wang@...driver.com>,
Yang Li <yang.lee@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Allen Pais <apais@...ux.microsoft.com>,
Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@...renesas.com>,
Biju Das <biju.das.jz@...renesas.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
dmaengine@...r.kernel.org,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dmaengine: remove debugfs #ifdef
Hi Arnd,
On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 02:50:52PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 2:47 PM Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> >
> > It's only a few bytes of data in struct dma_device, but a bit more in
> > .text here. Is the simplification really required in this driver ?
>
> The intention was to not change the resulting object code in this driver,
> and I still don't see where it would grow after dead-code-elimination removes
> all the unused static functions. What am I missing?
Indeed, gcc does a fairly good job there. The .text section doesn't
grow. Interestingly, there's an increase in size in the .data and
.rodata sections in the xilinx-dpdma module:
- 8 .rodata.str1.8 0000029f 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 00003660 2**3
+ 8 .rodata.str1.8 000002a7 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 00003660 2**3
- 10 .rodata 00001080 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 00003960 2**5
+ 10 .rodata 000010e0 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 00003960 2**5
- 15 .data 00001050 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 00004e40 2**5
+ 15 .data 00001090 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 00004ea0 2**5
I'm not entirely sure where it comes from, it may be related to
instrumentation caused by debugging options.
For your patch,
Reviewed-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
Powered by blists - more mailing lists