On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 11:45:19PM +0200, Ed Schouten wrote:
Hi Matthew,
2013/9/16 Matthew Fleming m...@freebsd.org:
Would it be possible to enable this only for devd, init, and clang binaries?
Or is it a matter of enabling it for library builds that are linked
statically with the
On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 19:30:01 -0700
Tim Kientzle kient...@freebsd.org wrote:
On Sep 15, 2013, at 2:24 PM, Ed Schouten e...@80386.nl wrote:
GCC and Clang support the -ffunction-sections and -fdata-sections
flags. Essentially, these flags force the compiler to put every
function and
(Copy for the list, wrong from address problem ...)
On 18/09/2013, at 4:22 PM, Konstantin Belousov kostik...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 11:45:19PM +0200, Ed Schouten wrote:
[...]
Honestly, I think we can assume we'll never reach the point where all
the components listed above
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 05:36:40PM +1000, Jan Mikkelsen wrote:
On 18/09/2013, at 4:22 PM, Konstantin Belousov kostik...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 11:45:19PM +0200, Ed Schouten wrote:
[ ... ]
Honestly, I think we can assume we'll never reach the point where all
the
On 18 Sep 2013, at 07:22, Konstantin Belousov kostik...@gmail.com wrote:
I think this is a wrong direction. First, the split should be done at
the source level, as it was usually done forever.
Until we are all using toolchains that support LTO (which requires importing a
new linker and will
On 18/09/2013, at 4:22 PM, Konstantin Belousov kostik...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 11:45:19PM +0200, Ed Schouten wrote:
[ ... ]
Honestly, I think we can assume we'll never reach the point where all
the components listed above will properly have all functions
partitioned over
... I'd rather see if we can actually separate out things some more so
these builds can shrink.
Eg, if there's malloc related functions that aren't used, maybe we should
break malloc down into a directory full of functions.
I'm not surprised libc++ is doing .. that. It's likely better on the
Hi Matthew,
2013/9/16 Matthew Fleming m...@freebsd.org:
Would it be possible to enable this only for devd, init, and clang binaries?
Or is it a matter of enabling it for library builds that are linked
statically with the mentioned binaries?
For it to have effect, it has to be enabled for both
Adrian Chadd wrote this message on Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 14:56 -0700:
... I'd rather see if we can actually separate out things some more so
these builds can shrink.
Eg, if there's malloc related functions that aren't used, maybe we should
break malloc down into a directory full of functions.
On Tue, 2013-09-17 at 14:56 -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote:
... I'd rather see if we can actually separate out things some more so
these builds can shrink.
Eg, if there's malloc related functions that aren't used, maybe we should
break malloc down into a directory full of functions.
Why is
On 17 September 2013 16:22, Ian Lepore i...@freebsd.org wrote:
On Tue, 2013-09-17 at 14:56 -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote:
... I'd rather see if we can actually separate out things some more so
these builds can shrink.
Eg, if there's malloc related functions that aren't used, maybe we should
On Sep 17, 2013 4:31 PM, Adrian Chadd adr...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 17 September 2013 16:22, Ian Lepore i...@freebsd.org wrote:
On Tue, 2013-09-17 at 14:56 -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote:
... I'd rather see if we can actually separate out things some more so
these builds can shrink.
Eg,
On Tue, 2013-09-17 at 16:31 -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote:
On 17 September 2013 16:22, Ian Lepore i...@freebsd.org wrote:
On Tue, 2013-09-17 at 14:56 -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote:
... I'd rather see if we can actually separate out things some more so
these builds can shrink.
Eg, if
In message CAJOYFBBGY0GosPwG1B=1mkyapchetx-o97r2zhxpgs8o7wo...@mail.gmail.com
, Ed Schouten writes:
Thoughts?
Jordan and I would have killed for that 19 years ago...
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer
On Sep 16, 2013, at 03:08, Adrian Chadd adr...@freebsd.org wrote:
The results are interesting. On amd64:
- devd suddenly becomes 500 KB in size, instead of a megabyte,
- init's size drops from 900 KB to 600 KB,
- clang becomes a megabyte smaller.
.. so, I'd like to know specific
On 16 Sep 2013, at 07:52, Dimitry Andric d...@freebsd.org wrote:
On Sep 16, 2013, at 03:08, Adrian Chadd adr...@freebsd.org wrote:
The results are interesting. On amd64:
- devd suddenly becomes 500 KB in size, instead of a megabyte,
- init's size drops from 900 KB to 600 KB,
- clang
On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Ed Schouten e...@80386.nl wrote:
Hi all,
Today I did a tiny experiment and I am not entirely sure what to do.
Throw away the patch or eventually push it into the tree.
GCC and Clang support the -ffunction-sections and -fdata-sections
flags. Essentially,
The results are interesting. On amd64:
- devd suddenly becomes 500 KB in size, instead of a megabyte,
- init's size drops from 900 KB to 600 KB,
- clang becomes a megabyte smaller.
.. so, I'd like to know specific information as to why these three are now
smaller. So what's going on?
On Sep 15, 2013, at 2:24 PM, Ed Schouten e...@80386.nl wrote:
GCC and Clang support the -ffunction-sections and -fdata-sections
flags. Essentially, these flags force the compiler to put every
function and variable in its own section. Though this will blow up the
….
- devd suddenly becomes 500
19 matches
Mail list logo
