Hmm. Particularly interesting is this series of "Considering" paragraphs. about 42 all together (one for each call to move3Servos() in loop()?)
============ Considering void move3Servos(Servo, float, Servo, float, Servo, float, float) with 87 size to be inlined into void loop() in oiOSoul.ino:353 Estimated growth after inlined into all is +176 insns. Estimated badness is -1073741832, frequency 0.04. Inlined into void loop() which now has time 467 and size 792,net change of -8. New minimal size reached: 1550 Considering void move3Servos(Servo, float, Servo, float, Servo, float, float) with 87 size to be inlined into void doseOff() in oiOSoul.ino:412 Estimated growth after inlined into all is +184 insns. Estimated badness is -1073741832, frequency 1.00. Inlined into void doseOff() which now has time 4671 and size 180,net change of -8. New minimal size reached: 1542 : Considering void move3Servos(Servo, float, Servo, float, Servo, float, float) with 87 size to be inlined into void loop() in oiOSoul.ino:325 Estimated growth after inlined into all is +412 insns. Estimated badness is -1073741824, frequency 0.01. Inlined into void loop() which now has time 360 and size 628,net change of +0. ============== Each time, the "estimated growth" grows by 8, but the "new minimal size" shrinks by 8 (if I'm even close to interpreting the text correctly.) That last one, where inlined growth of 412 instructions results in a loop() size of 360, is especially confusing. Also that value for "badness" is really suspicious (0xBFFFFFF8); in the older compiler, usual values were in the 100 to 1000 range. _______________________________________________ AVR-GCC-list mailing list AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
