This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC update increased the file size by 4x on PowerPC port
- From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- To: Felipe Gohring <lipee36 at gmail dot com>
- Cc: gcc-help <gcc-help at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2019 16:59:26 +0000
- Subject: Re: GCC update increased the file size by 4x on PowerPC port
- References: <CALeSs2LtzV-X7Jo8y93-uMPscoC9qXRsPneX+Qj3=YVfziWrJg@mail.gmail.com> <email@example.com>
On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 16:56, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
> On 2019-01-07 11:14 -0500, Felipe Gohring wrote:
> > Hello,
> > recently, I have updated my GCC PowerPC port from 6.3 to 8.2
> > As my architecture relies on SPE extension, I am using the SPE brench of
> > GCC (powerpc-eabispe-*).
> > Now, my question is related to the generated code. When using V6.3, I had
> > files of about 10k. After upgrading to V8.2, the very same file has more
> > than 40k. Why is that? Please keep in mind that I am using exactly the same
> > compilation flags (*-m32 -mmfpgpr -mabi=spe -mfloat-gprs=double -nostdlib
> > -ffreestanding -fno-builtin -O0 -g3 -std=c11 -Wno-packed-bitfield-compat
> > -Wall -Werror*) and source code, the only thing changing is the compiler
> > version. I wouldn't mind having a memory footprint a bit bigger, but the
> > overhead added is beyond acceptable.
> Is there any difference w/o -g3? A increased size of debugging symbols
> is not a bug and may provide better debug information for GDB. If the
> object code itself bloats there may be a regression.
And there's no memory overhead for debug info.
Compare the sizes of the files by using the 'size' command, not 'ls -l'.