On 9 March 2017 at 09:35, Steven Newbury <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, 2017-03-08 at 21:29 -0700, Brian Paul wrote: >> I just noticed something: >> >> $ ls -l lib/*_dri.so >> -rwxr-xr-x 8 brianp users 43779971 Mar 8 20:59 lib/i915_dri.so* >> -rwxr-xr-x 8 brianp users 43779971 Mar 8 20:59 lib/i965_dri.so* >> -rwxr-xr-x 8 brianp users 43779971 Mar 8 20:59 >> lib/nouveau_vieux_dri.so* >> -rwxr-xr-x 8 brianp users 43779971 Mar 8 20:59 lib/r200_dri.so* >> -rwxr-xr-x 8 brianp users 43779971 Mar 8 20:59 lib/radeon_dri.so* >> -rwxr-xr-x 8 brianp users 43779971 Mar 8 20:59 lib/swrast_dri.so* >> >> $ ls -l lib/gallium/*_dri.so >> -rwxr-xr-x 8 brianp users 47831465 Mar 8 20:59 >> lib/gallium/i915_dri.so* >> -rwxr-xr-x 8 brianp users 47831465 Mar 8 20:59 >> lib/gallium/kms_swrast_dri.so* >> -rwxr-xr-x 8 brianp users 47831465 Mar 8 20:59 >> lib/gallium/nouveau_dri.so* >> -rwxr-xr-x 8 brianp users 47831465 Mar 8 20:59 >> lib/gallium/r300_dri.so* >> -rwxr-xr-x 8 brianp users 47831465 Mar 8 20:59 >> lib/gallium/swrast_dri.so* >> -rwxr-xr-x 8 brianp users 47831465 Mar 8 20:59 >> lib/gallium/virtio_gpu_dri.so* >> -rwxr-xr-x 8 brianp users 47831465 Mar 8 20:59 >> lib/gallium/vmwgfx_dri.so* >> >> All the drivers are the same size. In fact, >> >> $ md5sum lib/gallium/*_dri.so >> ee2e5c4dc84001e99f54a6ddb8a5ee88 lib/gallium/i915_dri.so >> ee2e5c4dc84001e99f54a6ddb8a5ee88 lib/gallium/kms_swrast_dri.so >> ee2e5c4dc84001e99f54a6ddb8a5ee88 lib/gallium/nouveau_dri.so >> ee2e5c4dc84001e99f54a6ddb8a5ee88 lib/gallium/r300_dri.so >> ee2e5c4dc84001e99f54a6ddb8a5ee88 lib/gallium/swrast_dri.so >> ee2e5c4dc84001e99f54a6ddb8a5ee88 lib/gallium/virtio_gpu_dri.so >> ee2e5c4dc84001e99f54a6ddb8a5ee88 lib/gallium/vmwgfx_dri.so >> >> they're identical. I don't recall any of the proposed "mega driver" >> stuff landing. Can someone explains what's going on? >> > > As was mentioned, it landed long ago, but why is your driver so huge? > Unstripped? Is LTO making *that* much difference? I'm not optimizing > for size. > The ones listed by Brian are not stripped.
In my earlier testing 50-90% of the binary size was the shared/common code. That said - if we have a compelling reason for a "--build-separate-drivers" ~like configure toggle, I won't object. -Emil _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
