[U-Boot] [PATCH v4 09/13] hawkboard: Modify to work with generic relocation
Simon Glass
sjg at chromium.org
Sun Feb 26 19:09:24 CET 2012
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 7:11 AM, Sughosh Ganu <urwithsughosh at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Sughosh Ganu <urwithsughosh at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> hi Simon,
>> On Mon Feb 20, 2012 at 05:32:51PM -0800, Simon Glass wrote:
>> > Add use of common/ and lib/ libraries for the SPL stage, and
>> > add the new link symbol required for generic relocation.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>
>> > ---
>> > Changes in v4:
>> > - Split out hawkboard changes into new patch
>> >
>> > board/davinci/da8xxevm/u-boot-spl-hawk.lds | 1 +
>> > include/configs/hawkboard.h | 2 ++
>> > 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>
> <snip>
>
>>
>> Btw, i had quite a substantial increase in the spl image size with
>> these additions with a 4.5 based toolchain(will provide exact
>> toolchain details and size difference tonight). Building with a 4.6
>> based toolchain got the size increase down by quite a bit. Although i
>> don't have any size restrictions with spl on my board, this could be
>> a problem on boards which have these restrictions with toolchains
>> before 4.6.
>
>
> gcc(arm-none-linux-gnueabi) -- 4.5.2
> binutils -- 2.20
>
> spl size without this patch
> text data bss dec hex filename
> 5208 620 464 6292 1894 spl/u-boot-spl
>
> spl size with this patch
> text data bss dec hex filename
> 8897 620 476 9993 2709 spl/u-boot-spl
>
>
> gcc(arm-none-eabi) -- 4.6.2
> binutils -- 2.21
>
> spl size without this patch
> text data bss dec hex filename
> 4692 620 464 5776 1690 spl/u-boot-spl
>
> spl size with this patch
> text data bss dec hex filename
> 4812 620 476 5908 1714 spl/u-boot-spl
>
> -sughosh
Thanks for looking at this.
I'm not sure why it doesn't happen with your 4.6.2 compiler. With my
4.6.0 I do see the size increase.
It seems to be due to vsprintf:
text data bss dec hex filename
4011 0 22 4033 fc1 spl/lib/vsprintf.o
I wonder if it is a call to printf that the older compiler is failing
to optimize out?
Regards,
Simon
More information about the U-Boot
mailing list