Re: PCI Express support for 2.4 kernel

["Richard B. Johnson" <root@chaos.analogic.com>]

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003, Vladimir Kondratiev wrote:

> Kevin,
> there is no black magic. Compilation goes .c -> .s -> .o; if assembly
> have nothing added, object have not as well.
> To be sure, I did the following:
>
> [tmp]$ gcc -c t.c; objdump -xs t.o
>
> t.o:     file format elf32-i386
> t.o
> architecture: i386, flags 0x00000010:
> HAS_SYMS
> start address 0x00000000
>
> Sections:
> Idx Name          Size      VMA       LMA       File off  Algn
>   0 .text         00000000  00000000  00000000  00000034  2**2
>                   CONTENTS, ALLOC, LOAD, READONLY, CODE
>   1 .data         00000000  00000000  00000000  00000034  2**2
>                   CONTENTS, ALLOC, LOAD, DATA
>   2 .bss          00000008  00000000  00000000  00000034  2**2
>                   ALLOC
>   3 .note.GNU-stack 00000000  00000000  00000000  00000034  2**0
>                   CONTENTS, READONLY
>   4 .comment      00000033  00000000  00000000  00000034  2**0
>                   CONTENTS, READONLY
> SYMBOL TABLE:
> 00000000 l    df *ABS*    00000000 t.c
> 00000000 l    d  .text    00000000
> 00000000 l    d  .data    00000000
> 00000000 l    d  .bss    00000000
> 00000000 l     O .bss    00000004 a1
> 00000004 l     O .bss    00000004 a2
> 00000000 l    d  .note.GNU-stack    00000000
> 00000000 l    d  .comment    00000000
>
>
> Contents of section .text:
> Contents of section .data:
> Contents of section .note.GNU-stack:
> Contents of section .comment:
>  0000 00474343 3a202847 4e552920 332e332e  .GCC: (GNU) 3.3.
>  0010 31203230 30333038 31312028 52656420  1 20030811 (Red
>  0020 48617420 4c696e75 7820332e 332e312d  Hat Linux 3.3.1-
>  0030 312900                               1).
>
> Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
>
> > Vladimir Kondratiev wrote:
> >
> >> To illustrate zero cost, I did the following test:
> >> [tmp]$ cat t.c; gcc -S t.c; cat t.s
> >> static int a1=0;
> >> static int a2;
> >> /* EOF */
> >>
> >>    .file    "t.c"
> >>    .local    a1
> >>    .comm    a1,4,4
> >>    .local    a2
> >>    .comm    a2,4,4
> >>    .section    .note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits
> >>    .ident    "GCC: (GNU) 3.3.1 20030811 (Red Hat Linux 3.3.1-1)"
> >>
> >> As you can see, assembly code is identical, compiler did this trivial
> >> optimization for me.
> >
> >
> > You've missed the point, though. Initializing a static variable to
> > zero causes space to be consumed in the resulting object file (not
> > instruction code to be generated). This is wasted space, because if
> > you don't initialize to zero the variable will be allocated out of
> > space that is _automatically_ zeroed for you. This reduces the size of
> > the kernel image by not filling it with unnecessary zeroes.
> >

Easy way to remember is that if you have either a static or a global
variable that is initialized, it will be in the .data segment and,
therefore take up space in the executable. If it is not initialized,
it will be in the .bss segment, automatically zeroed by the loader.
In this case, the executable contains length information, not the data.
Local variables are never initialized unless there's an '=' in the
code.

Cheers,
Dick Johnson
Penguin : Linux version 2.4.22 on an i686 machine (797.90 BogoMips).
            Note 96.31% of all statistics are fiction.