From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mta1.formilux.org (mta1.formilux.org [51.159.59.229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0FB211E1A3D for ; Sun, 1 Feb 2026 21:49:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=51.159.59.229 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769982554; cv=none; b=hVVAO6sIAdyFK3cVI9J6bb22rTjuSo5NwFDahIM6hPik1wD264iVg+TuSCvehA7I7J60TqsquHH3ZpjBG/OCrCgu3M/ggikbbzKlU3l9ip68m2bItpda5PyPGpytEO9QXe7OmMykoFXFyl49DVwCHjk+7+RTCQ5Y+HfKR1VRaUU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769982554; c=relaxed/simple; bh=pjLvkdVtsIje5jAkR/iEWOPg2u1L4FSwHWo2LFlbufk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=aDMj/ITSOoUjdtRSqU4hWwHehINcy4BVmcaxT2ioIJByxwdE4p/F8hh+c8bimilAXdE0ndi/BM1TXoLqf4bSgxlAbfm/daRhoo/2OiVVklnfElpji5pQ83mKiu4QFy6aTyNMWBPdHOG+JlqcAmpYkVHseWXem+MJcuOYSnf1/+E= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=1wt.eu; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=1wt.eu; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=1wt.eu header.i=@1wt.eu header.b=IuFgTTz7; arc=none smtp.client-ip=51.159.59.229 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=1wt.eu Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=1wt.eu Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=1wt.eu header.i=@1wt.eu header.b="IuFgTTz7" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1wt.eu; s=mail; t=1769982549; bh=CAznquoW2KdCjHTBvdOgEwxFHFVek3CBci5Zx1H6GE8=; h=From:Message-ID:From; b=IuFgTTz7UUwxmDj5QjbA12apuFDyXQzGPuZlghaG8sMBYYtVujD56COmLJwwPq+ku SxyTYpqh9sJ2RjWPJJNfwOUPN729Po3+qjW2LryUMyJnVqfM7dL6bn+kFrH48AAlsf Nas8BXAxT8349nQSD/2cOgLHwd4+COlb+LusQVa8= Received: from 1wt.eu (ded1.1wt.eu [163.172.96.212]) by mta1.formilux.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F9E5C0ACA; Sun, 01 Feb 2026 22:49:09 +0100 (CET) Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2026 22:49:09 +0100 From: Willy Tarreau To: Daniel Palmer Cc: linux@weissschuh.net, kees@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/9] nolibc: Add static-pie support Message-ID: References: <20260131074440.732588-1-daniel@thingy.jp> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Mon, Feb 02, 2026 at 06:45:40AM +0900, Daniel Palmer wrote: > Hi Willy, > > On Mon, 2 Feb 2026 at 03:14, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > $ diff -u ret0*size > > --- ret0-6.19-rc7.size 2026-02-01 19:04:33.918536545 +0100 > > +++ ret0-daniel.size 2026-02-01 19:04:40.914761767 +0100 > > @@ -16,4 +16,5 @@ > > 0000000000000011 W raise > > 0000000000000012 W abort > > 0000000000000023 W memmove > > -0000000000000098 W _start_c > > +0000000000000086 W __start_c > > +000000000000015f W _start_c > > > > The delta is indeed 333 bytes. > > > > Is there anything we could detect at build time to detect that we want to > > go the heavy way ? Maybe we should only condition that code to __PIE__ ? > > There's nothing critical, it's really about having an open discussion on > > this, because we're trying to keep the minimal binaries small, and here > > we're just doubling the size of the smallest ones all the time. > > > > Thanks! > > Willy > > Thank you for the feedback. I'll work out a way of hiding all of the > new code unless it's needed. > I think there might still be some increase in size from splitting > _start_c() into two parts though. Yes but that's expected. We can spend a few bytes here and there for the good cause, it's just that here there's an opportunity to avoid most of them when not needed. Thanks, Willy