Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Tue, 4 Mar 2003 18:11:50 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: Kernel bloat 2.4 vs. 2.5 |
| |
Chris Wedgwood <cw@f00f.org> wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 03:41:05PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > Daniel Egger <degger@fhm.edu> wrote: > > > > I've seen surprisingly few messages about the dramatic size > > > increase between a simple 2.4 and a 2.5 kernel image. > > > 2.4 has magical size reduction tricks in it which were not brought > > into 2.5 because we expect that gcc will do it for us. > > I can't see it helping *that* much, for me I have: > > charon:~/wk/linux% size 2.4.x-cw/vmlinux bk-2.5.x/vmlinux > text data bss dec hex filename > 2003887 120260 191657 2315804 23561c 2.4.x-cw/vmlinux > 2411323 267551 181004 2859878 2ba366 bk-2.5.x/vmlinux > > gcc version 2.95.4 20011002 (Debian prerelease) > > this is for functionally (in terms of .config) equivalent kernels. >
Don't know what your point is here, really.
2.4 has hacks to make it smaller. iirc they were worth ~200 kbytes, or around 10%.
gcc-3.x string sharing was supposed to make those hacks unnecesary. However a quick test here shows gcc-3.2.1 generating a 10% larger 2.5 image than gcc-2.95.3, so a club may need to be taken to 2.5 as well.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |