kernel/git - git - PowerEL Git System

15975 Commits

6 Branches

36 Tags

131 MiB

Tree: ee20a129de

Commit Graph

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Junio C Hamano	559e840b74	Move read_in_full() and write_in_full() to wrapper.c A few compat/* layer functions call these functions, but we would really want to keep them thin, without depending too much on the libgit proper. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	17 years ago
Linus Torvalds	112db553b0	Shrink the git binary a bit by avoiding unnecessary inline functions So I was looking at the disgusting size of the git binary, and even with the debugging removed, and using -Os instead of -O2, the size of the text section was pretty high. In this day and age I guess almost a megabyte of text isn't really all that surprising, but it still doesn't exactly make me think "lean and mean". With -Os, a surprising amount of text space is wasted on inline functions that end up just being replicated multiple times, and where performance really isn't a valid reason to inline them. In particular, the trivial wrapper functions like "xmalloc()" are used _everywhere_, and making them inline just duplicates the text (and the string we use to 'die()' on failure) unnecessarily. So this just moves them into a "wrapper.c" file, getting rid of a tiny bit of unnecessary bloat. The following numbers are both with "CFLAGS=-Os": Before: [torvalds@woody git]$ size git text data bss dec hex filename 700460 15160 292184 1007804 f60bc git After: [torvalds@woody git]$ size git text data bss dec hex filename 670540 15160 292184 977884 eebdc git so it saves almost 30k of text-space (it actually saves more than that with the default -O2, but I don't think that's necessarily a very relevant number from a "try to shrink git" standpoint). It might conceivably have a performance impact, but none of this should be _that_ performance critical. The real cost is not generally in the wrapper anyway, but in the code it wraps (ie the cost of "xread()" is all in the read itself, not in the trivial wrapping of it). Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	17 years ago

Author

SHA1

Message

Date

Junio C Hamano

559e840b74

Move read_in_full() and write_in_full() to wrapper.c

A few compat/* layer functions call these functions, but we would really
want to keep them thin, without depending too much on the libgit proper.

Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>

17 years ago

Linus Torvalds

112db553b0

Shrink the git binary a bit by avoiding unnecessary inline functions

So I was looking at the disgusting size of the git binary, and even with
the debugging removed, and using -Os instead of -O2, the size of the text
section was pretty high. In this day and age I guess almost a megabyte of
text isn't really all that surprising, but it still doesn't exactly make
me think "lean and mean".

With -Os, a surprising amount of text space is wasted on inline functions
that end up just being replicated multiple times, and where performance
really isn't a valid reason to inline them. In particular, the trivial
wrapper functions like "xmalloc()" are used _everywhere_, and making them
inline just duplicates the text (and the string we use to 'die()' on
failure) unnecessarily.

So this just moves them into a "wrapper.c" file, getting rid of a tiny bit
of unnecessary bloat. The following numbers are both with "CFLAGS=-Os":

Before:
	[torvalds@woody git]$ size git
	   text	   data	    bss	    dec	    hex	filename
	 700460	  15160	 292184	1007804	  f60bc	git

After:
	[torvalds@woody git]$ size git
	   text	   data	    bss	    dec	    hex	filename
	 670540	  15160	 292184	 977884	  eebdc	git

so it saves almost 30k of text-space (it actually saves more than that
with the default -O2, but I don't think that's necessarily a very relevant
number from a "try to shrink git" standpoint).

It might conceivably have a performance impact, but none of this should be
_that_ performance critical. The real cost is not generally in the wrapper
anyway, but in the code it wraps (ie the cost of "xread()" is all in the
read itself, not in the trivial wrapping of it).

Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>

17 years ago

2 Commits (ee20a129de6f332da092e93feb2dd5f8330f9bc0)