On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > Well, once again, seeing some numbers would be good. :) >> >> What numbers do you want? Size comparisons with all SoC options on vs only one? > > Yes, size comparisions with all SoCs (for given family) turned on vs > only one turned on (done on kernel without this patch applied). > > Also size comparisons for ARCH_EXYNOS4 and ARCH_EXYNOS5 both turned > on vs only ARCH_EXYNOS4 or ARCH_EXYNOS5 turned on (with this patch > applied). exynos_defconfig-based build data below. text data bss dec hex filename 5109986 319952 270196 5700134 56fa26 obj-tmp/vmlinux # all 4+5 SoCs enabled 5088312 296912 270196 5655420 564b7c obj-tmp/vmlinux # EXYNOS5 off, all EXYNOS4 SoCs enabled 5088032 296896 270196 5655124 564a54 obj-tmp/vmlinux # Only 4210 enabled 5079205 299928 270068 5649201 563331 obj-tmp/vmlinux # EXYNOS4 off, all EXYNOS5 SoCs enabled 5063355 286792 270068 5620215 55c1f7 obj-tmp/vmlinux # Only 5250 enabled 5067815 298152 270068 5636035 55ffc3 obj-tmp/vmlinux # Only 5250+5420 enabled 5053357 278480 269364 5601201 5577b1 obj-tmp/vmlinux # Only 5440 enabled The main difference of disabling 5440 is that it removed the PCI support, which explains that reduction in size. So, I would argue that theere might be some value in disabling whole families (since it saves about 20k of text and the same of data), but that there's less gain per SoC member. 5440 is an oddball in this setup so it might make sense to treat it differently due to the PCI aspect. -Olof -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |