-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 48
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Reduce libkafel.so size #20
Comments
mejedi
added a commit
to mejedi/kafel
that referenced
this issue
May 3, 2019
libkafel.so 5x smaller (x86_64, stripped): down to 88KiB from 440KiB. Closes google#20
mejedi
added a commit
to mejedi/kafel
that referenced
this issue
May 3, 2019
libkafel.so 5x smaller (x86_64, stripped): down to 88KiB from 440KiB. Closes google#20
mejedi
added a commit
to mejedi/kafel
that referenced
this issue
May 3, 2019
libkafel.so 5x smaller (x86_64, stripped): down to 88KiB from 440KiB. Closes google#20
mejedi
added a commit
to mejedi/kafel
that referenced
this issue
May 5, 2019
libkafel.so 5x smaller (x86_64, stripped): down to 88KiB from 440KiB. Closes google#20
mejedi
added a commit
to mejedi/kafel
that referenced
this issue
May 5, 2019
libkafel.so 5x smaller (x86_64, stripped): down to 88KiB from 440KiB. Closes google#20
mejedi
added a commit
to mejedi/kafel
that referenced
this issue
May 5, 2019
libkafel.so 5x smaller (x86_64, stripped): down to 88KiB from 440KiB. Closes google#20
mejedi
added a commit
to mejedi/kafel
that referenced
this issue
May 5, 2019
libkafel.so 5x smaller (x86_64, stripped): down to 88KiB from 440KiB. Closes google#20
mejedi
added a commit
to mejedi/kafel
that referenced
this issue
May 5, 2019
libkafel.so 5x smaller (x86_64, stripped): down to 88KiB from 440KiB. Closes google#20
mejedi
added a commit
to mejedi/kafel
that referenced
this issue
May 5, 2019
libkafel.so 5x smaller (x86_64, stripped): down to 88KiB from 440KiB. Closes google#20
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Currently
libkafel.so
takes 440KiB (x86_64
, release, stripped) which seems superfluous.On top of that, it has 7122 relocations and relocation definitions themselves take 167KiB. This has runtime cost as well.
Proposal:
exploit redundancy in the data set to reduce the footprint;
get rid of relocations — instead of storing string pointers in tables use integral offsets in a string pool. The later is cumbersome to do manually, use code generation.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: