<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><blockquote type="cite"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin-top: 0pt; margin-right: 0pt; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0.8ex; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex; position: static; z-index: auto; "><div class="im"><br>
</div>How are you grabbing the footprint? Is this just compile time or does it include link time?</blockquote><div>These are both for compile as well as linking<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>OK.</div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
Can you separate out compiling object files from linking? i.e. if most of the work is being done in the linker then there's not much we can do).</blockquote><div>I do hope separation will take more time and investigation<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>OK. You can get the "compile my objects" and "link my objects" time pretty easy by just timing the run of the link step and subtracting. Also, are you doing multiple make jobs at once? It'll have some bearing on the results.</div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div class="gmail_quote"><div>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"> How are you getting the memory footprint? </blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
foot prints are being taken with du -h pkg/bin and pkg/lib,<br></blockquote><div>pkg/bin holds all the binaries and pkg/lib holds all the lib files.<br>Though, These approaches are not good. This will be give enough info whether to invest the time for the support or not?<br>
</div><div>memory foot <br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>That approach is horrible. That's merely measuring the size of the binaries that exist on disk, not the in-memory footprint. It is definitely not what you think you're checking. And, if that's what you're curious about then just compile with --enable-targets=x86 for llvm and it should shrink a bit. The size on disk has very little bearing to the in memory size during a compile.</div><div><br></div><div>-eric</div></div><br></body></html>