On Fri, 2007-09-07 at 18:30 +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> On Friday 07 September 2007 17:31, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 18:07 +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> > > A bit extended version:
> > >
> > > In the process in making it work I saw ~10% vmlinux size reductions
> > > (which
On Fri, 2007-09-07 at 19:24 +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> Hi Daniel.
>
> > > I did that before I posted patches to lkml.
> > > IOW: posted patches are not broken versus module loading.
> >
> > Ok, this is more like the explanation I was looking for..
> >
> > During this thread you seemed to indic
On Friday 07 September 2007 17:31, Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 18:07 +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> > A bit extended version:
> >
> > In the process in making it work I saw ~10% vmlinux size reductions
> > (which basically matches what Marcelo says) when I wasn't retaining
> > sec
Hi Daniel.
> > I did that before I posted patches to lkml.
> > IOW: posted patches are not broken versus module loading.
>
> Ok, this is more like the explanation I was looking for..
>
> During this thread you seemed to indicate the patches you release
> reduced the kernel ~10% , but now your sa
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 18:07 +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> A bit extended version:
>
> In the process in making it work I saw ~10% vmlinux size reductions
> (which basically matches what Marcelo says) when I wasn't retaining
> sections needed for EXPORT_SYMBOLs, but module loading didn't work.
>
On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 12:01:56AM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
>...
> > And code review and Denys' patch have cumulative effects since his patch
> > results in improvements that can't be resonably done other than at
> > the ld and/or gcc level.
>
> I was talking about introducing such things in de
* Thu, 6 Sep 2007 23:19:55 +0200
>
> On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 11:16:15PM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
>> * Thu, 6 Sep 2007 22:39:31 +0200
>>
>> []
>> >> > His patch improves the build process.
>> >>
>> >> I would like to know timing, btw. Size, especially shown 1%, doesn't
>> >> matter if link time i
On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 11:16:15PM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
> * Thu, 6 Sep 2007 22:39:31 +0200
>
> []
> >> > His patch improves the build process.
> >>
> >> I would like to know timing, btw. Size, especially shown 1%, doesn't
> >> matter if link time increased dramatically. `Allyes' config, when
* Thu, 6 Sep 2007 22:39:31 +0200
[]
>> > His patch improves the build process.
>>
>> I would like to know timing, btw. Size, especially shown 1%, doesn't
>> matter if link time increased dramatically. `Allyes' config, when i
>> had fast and rammish machine was terrible thing (last winter). If 32
On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 10:43:49PM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 02:21:43PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> []
> > > You've did a tool. Documenting this tool to have it available for
> > > testers/janitors/maintainers is a better way, than to have all that
> > > opinions/problems
On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 02:21:43PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
[]
> > You've did a tool. Documenting this tool to have it available for
> > testers/janitors/maintainers is a better way, than to have all that
> > opinions/problems with merging-to-mainline.
>
> There is no problem with his patch.
>
>
On Thursday 06 September 2007 16:13, Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 11:57 +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> > On Wednesday 05 September 2007 20:46, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2007-09-05 at 20:49 +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> > >
> > > > What does "it" stand for in this sentence
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 11:57 +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> On Wednesday 05 September 2007 20:46, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-09-05 at 20:49 +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> >
> > > What does "it" stand for in this sentence?
> >
> > "it" is your patches, and I think we got to bottom of it
On Thursday 06 September 2007 12:40, Oleg Verych wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 11:55:46AM +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> > We already do it, but we don't have enough developers to audit
> > every driver for every possible combination of config options.
> > As a result, there always be some amoun
On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 01:40:44PM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 11:55:46AM +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> []
> > > Give me example, please, why function must be non static if not used.
> >
> > Where do you see I'm saying that they must be non-static?
> > I'm all for marking
On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 11:55:46AM +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
[]
> > Give me example, please, why function must be non static if not used.
>
> Where do you see I'm saying that they must be non-static?
> I'm all for marking functions static. I just did it for aic7xxx.
>
> > If usage requires kco
On Wednesday 05 September 2007 20:46, Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-09-05 at 20:49 +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
>
> > What does "it" stand for in this sentence?
>
> "it" is your patches, and I think we got to bottom of it .. "it" (i.e.
> your patches) don't actually work with modules, which
On Wednesday 05 September 2007 21:34, Oleg Verych wrote:
> > > > Build system: section garbage collection for vmlinux
> > >
> > > Maybe this is just a test suit to get finish with `make XYZ static`?
> >
> > They are vaguely connected in a sense that unused function which is
> > not marked static
On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 10:34:38PM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 07:46:11PM +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> > On Wednesday 05 September 2007 16:53, Oleg Verych wrote:
> > > * Wed, 5 Sep 2007 14:43:21 +0100
> > > * User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1
> > > >
> > > > Build system: section ga
On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 07:46:11PM +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> On Wednesday 05 September 2007 16:53, Oleg Verych wrote:
> > * Wed, 5 Sep 2007 14:43:21 +0100
> > * User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1
> > >
> > > Build system: section garbage collection for vmlinux
> >
> > Maybe this is just a test suit to g
On Wed, 2007-09-05 at 20:49 +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> What does "it" stand for in this sentence?
"it" is your patches, and I think we got to bottom of it .. "it" (i.e.
your patches) don't actually work with modules, which is what you
originally contended ..
> My patch was tested to work in
On Wednesday 05 September 2007 20:07, Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-09-05 at 20:14 +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> > On Wednesday 05 September 2007 19:38, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > > > > You version doesn't work with CONFIG_MODULES right?
> > > >
> > > > It works with CONFIG_MODULES.
> > >
>
On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 12:24:04PM -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-09-05 at 21:31 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 08:14:12PM +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 05 September 2007 19:38, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > > > > > You version doesn't work with CONFI
On Wed, 2007-09-05 at 21:31 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 08:14:12PM +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> > On Wednesday 05 September 2007 19:38, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > > > > You version doesn't work with CONFIG_MODULES right?
> > > >
> > > > It works with CONFIG_MODULES.
> > >
On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 08:14:12PM +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> On Wednesday 05 September 2007 19:38, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > > > You version doesn't work with CONFIG_MODULES right?
> > >
> > > It works with CONFIG_MODULES.
> >
> > Really? Take a look at this version,
> >
> > http://lkml.org/
On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 02:43:21PM +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> Build system: section garbage collection for vmlinux
>
> Newer gcc and binutils can do dead code and data removal
> at link time. It is achieved using combination of
> -ffunction-sections -fdata-sections options for gcc and
> --gc-
On Wed, 2007-09-05 at 20:14 +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> On Wednesday 05 September 2007 19:38, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > > > You version doesn't work with CONFIG_MODULES right?
> > >
> > > It works with CONFIG_MODULES.
> >
> > Really? Take a look at this version,
> >
> > http://lkml.org/lkml/20
On Wednesday 05 September 2007 19:38, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > > You version doesn't work with CONFIG_MODULES right?
> >
> > It works with CONFIG_MODULES.
>
> Really? Take a look at this version,
>
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/6/4/169
>
> Marcello had to implement a two pass build to add back sy
On Wed, 2007-09-05 at 19:37 +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> On Wednesday 05 September 2007 17:29, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-09-05 at 14:43 +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> > > Build system: section garbage collection for vmlinux
> > >
> > >
> > > Newer gcc and binutils can do dead code a
On Wednesday 05 September 2007 16:53, Oleg Verych wrote:
> * Wed, 5 Sep 2007 14:43:21 +0100
> * User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1
> >
> > Build system: section garbage collection for vmlinux
>
> Maybe this is just a test suit to get finish with `make XYZ static`?
They are vaguely connected in a sense that
On Wednesday 05 September 2007 17:29, Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-09-05 at 14:43 +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> > Build system: section garbage collection for vmlinux
> >
> >
> > Newer gcc and binutils can do dead code and data removal
> > at link time. It is achieved using combination of
On Wed, 2007-09-05 at 14:43 +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> Build system: section garbage collection for vmlinux
>
>
> Newer gcc and binutils can do dead code and data removal
> at link time. It is achieved using combination of
> -ffunction-sections -fdata-sections options for gcc and
> --gc-secti
* Wed, 5 Sep 2007 14:43:21 +0100
* User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1
>
> Build system: section garbage collection for vmlinux
>
Maybe this is just a test suit to get finish with `make XYZ static`?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMA
Build system: section garbage collection for vmlinux
Newer gcc and binutils can do dead code and data removal
at link time. It is achieved using combination of
-ffunction-sections -fdata-sections options for gcc and
--gc-sections for ld.
Theory of operation:
Option -ffunction-sections instructs
34 matches
Mail list logo
