Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2011 23:40:51 +0400 From: Michael Tokarev <mjt@....msk.ru> To: owl-dev@...ts.openwall.com CC: Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com> Subject: Re: kernel size On 24.10.2011 21:56, Vasiliy Kulikov wrote:  >> I find it weird that the kernel became smaller for x86_64 (by approx. 1%), >> but significantly larger for i686 (by approx. 7%). This might indicate a >> problem that we'd want to deal with irrespective of any size limits. > > This might be kernel optimizations for specific gcc version (Something > between 3.x and 4.x), which might be wrong for other versions. I suppose > if we try to compile Linux 2.6.32, we would get more adequate numbers > (IOW, with the upgrade from 4.4 to 4.6). For 32bit code, gcc4.6 produces significantly (sometimes >25%) larger executables than 4.4 did. I haven't investigated this further. /mjt
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.