LTO #2169
Draft
LTO #2169
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Build size and comparison to main:
|
Member
Author
|
Since more functions get inlined, the stack has to accommodate more local variables at once. Given the increased stack usage of LTO, I think this is may be not such a good idea, as InfiniTime is very RAM limited - moreso than it is flash limited. This PR works perfectly fine though, so keeping it around as a draft Edit: Need to collect some actual numbers for memory usage LTO off/on |
Member
Author
|
With #2331 systemtask stack pressure is reduced now. Still, it needs some extra compared to before. I'm using GCC 14 locally, but I've never seen it go below 48 minimum with 400 size so that should be sufficient |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Based off #867, a compiler upgrade isn't needed anymore and I also simplified the changeset to the minimal needed.
I'm testing it locally now and all seems good so far, but I've only been running it for a few hours.
The original in discussion in #867 regarding why the memory usage has changed is still to be answered - I haven't looked into this yet