Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2013 16:18:00 -0500 From: Joshua Isom <jrisom@gmail.com> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: GSOC 2013 project " Kernel Size Reduction for Embedded System " Message-ID: <51648588.7010209@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <92799D4C-797C-4304-B299-DD1DBA49CFFC@FreeBSD.org> References: <CAOhv3dpTM9J9oiLpdw8xOAToXT_tQ3VW4Mv1F%2B8n7xhG%2BJK93w@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1304091935490.13342@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <516452C7.7040607@mu.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1304091953060.13438@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <CAOjFWZ6ytuKFHYBvrNTMwK8f=_ZDnGY5-naVqscC6YWZ33P8UA@mail.gmail.com> <92799D4C-797C-4304-B299-DD1DBA49CFFC@FreeBSD.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On 4/9/2013 1:47 PM, Edward Tomasz Napierała wrote: > In order to optimize - in this case for size - we need a way to measure > what should we focus on, and it looks like we don't have it yet. > > Would it be possible to write a tool - e.g. by instrumenting LLVM - that > would make it possible to calculate, for every function in the call graph, > the amount of code in that function and everything it "pulls in", i.e. all > the code paths that it might call. When we have that, clustering the graph > should give us some idea what to focus on. > > Or perhaps such a tool already exists? > Would clang's LTO help for size? I know work's starting on the bsd elftools ld, but I doubt it has any LTO support yet. Running -Os on the kernel as a whole instead of object files could probably help a lot also. I might try to set it up and see a size comparision. Also, what about the userland? Linux got popular for embedded partly for busybox and uclibc. If Linux didn't exist, someone would have ported minix instead.home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?51648588.7010209>