Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2016 14:18:10 -0800 From: Adrian Chadd <adrian.chadd@gmail.com> To: Eugene Grosbein <eugen@grosbein.net> Cc: "freebsd-mips@freebsd.org" <freebsd-mips@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: MIPS code size strangeness Message-ID: <CAJ-VmokUfc2ABY1O0B7RqzfCmU_99VwnCmmHfhcRhM5NcH4Ubg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5831E800.60003@grosbein.net> References: <5831E800.60003@grosbein.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* is this gcc-4.2 ? * can you disassemble that mips function and see? thanks! -a On 20 November 2016 at 10:14, Eugene Grosbein <eugen@grosbein.net> wrote: > Hi! > > I'm currently struggle trying to fit my FreeBSD 12/mips build into 8M flash available. > It used to fit with early 11.0-CURRENT and it has over megabyte overhead with 12.0-CURRENT. > > Large parts are /usr/bin and /usr/lib and I've found something very strange. > For example: /usr/lib/libprivateucl.so.1 has 136064 bytes for amd64 > and it has 241560 bytes for mips. > > "nm -C -D --print-size --size-sort libprivateucl.so.1" shows the symbol "ucl_hash_replace" > has 330 bytes (0x14a) for amd64 and it has 25000 bytes (sic! 0x61a8) for mips. > > I understand that amd64 version is built with clang and MIPS code generated with gcc. > But why such large difference? In no way such small function ucl_hash_replace() > should expand to 25000 machine code bytes. > > I suspect other parts of code may have this problem too. > > Eugene Grosbein > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-mips@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-mips > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-mips-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-VmokUfc2ABY1O0B7RqzfCmU_99VwnCmmHfhcRhM5NcH4Ubg>