On Thu 9 Oct 2008 11:21, Adrian Bunk pondered: > On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 02:19:36PM -0700, Tim Bird wrote: > > I've been thinking about a tool that might be useful > > to track kernel size changes. I'm posting this > > Request For Comments to get feedback, and determine > > if this is something that would be worthwhile to > > pursue. > > > > What I envision is some new kernel build targets, specifically > > related to gathering size information and generating a size > > comparison report. Some small helper scripts would be written > > to gather the necessary information, and generate the report. > >... > > Any comments? > > The building blocks that would be useful are IMHO: > - a make target that generates a report for one kernel > (like the checkstack or export_report targets) and the report includes sizes of more than just the text section? Which is my biggest pet peeve with bloat-o-meter today, since it uses nm, not readelf - and saving data is just as important as saving instruction. > - a script that compares two such reports and outputs the > size differences > > That's also easy to do, and if that's what's wanted I can send a patch > that does it. > > Everything else is IMHO overdesigned. I understand the desire though - make it easier to compare two setups. capturing a make target into a file, (make size_report > config1.size) and running a compare on two outputs seems like a more "standard" way of doing things... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-embedded" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
