Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 20:49:28 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 20:49:28 -0500 Received: from tapu.f00f.org ([202.49.232.129]:18846 "EHLO tapu.f00f.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 20:49:27 -0500 Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 17:59:57 -0800 From: Chris Wedgwood To: Andrew Morton Cc: Daniel Egger , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Kernel bloat 2.4 vs. 2.5 Message-ID: <20030305015957.GA27985@f00f.org> References: <1046817738.4754.33.camel@sonja> <20030304154105.7a2db7fa.akpm@digeo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030304154105.7a2db7fa.akpm@digeo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i X-No-Archive: Yes Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1017 Lines: 28 On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 03:41:05PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > Daniel Egger 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. --cw - 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/