Hi, On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 at 08:32, Tom Rini <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 09, 2024 at 04:26:15PM +0100, Michal Simek wrote: > > > > > > On 12/6/24 20:20, Simon Glass wrote: > > > On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 at 03:18, Michal Simek <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Calling empty function when BINMAN_FDT is adding +64B for nothing which > > > > is > > > > not helping on size sensitive configurations as Xilinx mini > > > > configurations. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <[email protected]> > > > > --- > > > > > > > > Changes in v2: > > > > - new patch > > > > > > > > From my perspective there is no reason to call empty function. It is > > > > just > > > > increase footprint for nothing and we are not far from that limit now. > > > > > > > > --- > > > > common/board_r.c | 7 +++---- > > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <[email protected]> > > > > > > This is a bit odd, though. Do you have LTO enabled? > > > > > > > yes LTO is enabled. And there are other candidates like this. > > Is LTO able to fix function arrays which is calling empty function? > > > > (without this patch) > > > > 00000000fffc0eb4 <initr_of_live>: > > fffc0eb4: 52800000 mov w0, #0x0 // > > #0 > > fffc0eb8: d65f03c0 ret > > > > 00000000fffc0ebc <initr_dm_devices>: > > fffc0ebc: 52800000 mov w0, #0x0 // > > #0 > > fffc0ec0: d65f03c0 ret > > > > 00000000fffc0ec4 <initr_bootstage>: > > fffc0ec4: 52800000 mov w0, #0x0 // > > #0 > > fffc0ec8: d65f03c0 ret > > > > 00000000fffc0ecc <power_init_board>: > > fffc0ecc: 52800000 mov w0, #0x0 // > > #0 > > fffc0ed0: d65f03c0 ret > > > > 00000000fffc0ed4 <initr_announce>: > > fffc0ed4: 52800000 mov w0, #0x0 // > > #0 > > fffc0ed8: d65f03c0 ret > > > > 00000000fffc0edc <initr_binman>: > > fffc0edc: 52800000 mov w0, #0x0 // > > #0 > > fffc0ee0: d65f03c0 ret > > > > 00000000fffc0ee4 <initr_status_led>: > > fffc0ee4: 52800000 mov w0, #0x0 // > > #0 > > fffc0ee8: d65f03c0 ret > > > > 00000000fffc0eec <initr_boot_led_blink>: > > fffc0eec: 52800000 mov w0, #0x0 // > > #0 > > fffc0ef0: d65f03c0 ret > > > > 00000000fffc0ef4 <initr_boot_led_on>: > > fffc0ef4: 52800000 mov w0, #0x0 // > > #0 > > fffc0ef8: d65f03c0 ret > > > > 00000000fffc0efc <initr_lmb>: > > fffc0efc: 52800000 mov w0, #0x0 // > > #0 > > fffc0f00: d65f03c0 ret > > No, but maybe Simon would prefer if we marked all of the could-be-empty > functions as __maybe_unused and did: > CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(BINMAN_FDT, initr_binman), > etc in the list instead?
Yes that looks better. Michal, see also [1] in case you can work out why it 'stopped working'. I could have sworn inlining the function was a win when it was applied, but no amount of toolchain juggling could make it be a win when I came back to it later. Regards, SImon [1] e7f59dea880 Revert "initcall: Move to inline function"
