svn commit: r316132 - head/sys/boot/i386/boot2

[Ngie Cooper (yaneurabeya)]

> On Mar 29, 2017, at 23:38, Warner Losh <imp at bsdimp.com> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 12:23 AM, Bruce Evans <brde at optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>> I doubt that gcc-6.3 is very broken.  Did its CFLAGS even have -Os?
> 
> Yes. boot2 doesn't use the kernel CFLAGS.
> 
>> Kernel CFLAGS are still broken even for gcc-4.2, by sprinkling inline
>> parameter magic that was more needed for gcc-3.3.  The magic isn't
>> really right for gcc-4.2, and breaks -Os for kernels.
> 
> There is different magic for boot2.
> 
>> The magic might
>> be wronger for gcc-6.3, though it would be a compiler bug to not
>> just ignore it if it is nonsense.  clang doesn't provide any control
>> over inlining AFAIK, but ignores gcc directive to limit it and does
>> too much.
> 
> Yes. It does. Hence my glowing review of 6.3 :) But you are right. I'm
> likely being overly harsh without commanding enough facts to get past
> my preconceived notions... I don't know if this is a simple compiler
> bug, lack of proper options, or a need to do things differently.
> Latter day versions of gcc have many more knobs to turn here. I don't
> know yet if turning any of them will be helpful. I'm looking to
> automate the knob turning so that we can at least see which optimizer
> options have an effect on the size. I doubt more than half a dozen
> have any useful effect on the size, and finding the right combination
> likely will suffice. Or we wait for gcc 7 and hope for the best...
> 
> But this is nothing new. gcc 5.4.0 has -504 bytes free. gcc 4.9.4 has
> the same. 4.8.5 has -472, etc. It's clear that the magic sweet spot
> we're in with the in-tree 4.2.1 compiler isn't the sweet spot for
> these compilers... Then again, clang generated bloated like this until
> we got boot2 into their test suit, and now we have 100 bytes to spare
> there.

I know that a handful of people (several years ago) spent a lot of time making clang work with boot2 and be under the limit. I’m not entirely sure, but we could have done similar things (but in more ominous ways in) gcc 4.2.1 to shrink down the boot loader.

Just a thought >_>…

-Ngie

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 842 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-src-all/attachments/20170329/fbe0361f/attachment.sig>