[U-Boot] [RFC][PATCH] Update malloc to dlmalloc version 2.8.4

[T Ziomek]

On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 02:34:32PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Tuesday 07 July 2009 12:30:18 Kumar Gala wrote:
> > Here are some size #'s
> >
> > [galak at blarg u-boot-85xx]$ size u-boot
> >     text	   data	    bss	    dec	    hex	filename
> >   392040	  50536	  41957	 484533	  764b5	u-boot
> >   397660	  49500	  42397	 489557	  77855	u-boot		(new dlmalloc)
> >
> > [galak at blarg u-boot-85xx]$ size common/dlmalloc.o
> >     text	   data	    bss	    dec	    hex	filename
> >     4768	   1056	     56	   5880	   16f8	common/dlmalloc.o
> >    10390	     16	    492	  10898	   2a92	common/dlmalloc.o	(new
> > dlmalloc)
> 
> to say it has increased is an understatement.  i cant imagine the upstream 
> code increasing that much.  perhaps we had trimmed/customized the 
> implementation so as to shrink it ?
> 
> > old dlmalloc:
> > [galak at blarg u-boot-85xx]$ nm --size-sort common/dlmalloc.o
> 
> use the bloatcheck script to do a human readable compare between the two 
> objects.  you can find it in the linux kernel.

And/or, 'pahole' (Poke-a-hole) or some of the other "7 Dwarves" tools
might help shed light on the differences.

LWN article <http://lwn.net/Articles/335942/> (how I heard about them)
GIT <http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/acme/pahole.git>
OLS '07 paper <http://oops.ghostprotocols.net:81/acme/7dwarves.pdf> or
  <http://ols.fedoraproject.org/OLS/Reprints-2007/melo-Reprint.pdf>

Tom
-- 
It is of fundamental importance to understand   |
that the primary recipient of your source code  | Email to 'CTZ001'
is not the compiler but your coworkers.         |    at 'email.mot.com'
   -- KreaTV SW Dev Guidelines                  |