t; *Sent:* Tuesday, March 1, 2016 1:34 PM
> *To:* Pavel Labath ; Mikhail Filimonov <
> mfilimo...@nvidia.com>
>
>
> *Cc:* lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
> *Subject:* Re: [lldb-dev] lldb-server stripped binary size: AArch64 ~16Mb
> vs ARM ~9 Mb
>
>
>
> As Pavel mentioned th
get a glimpse on the direction of development for
that target.
Regards,
Mikhail
From: Tamas Berghammer [mailto:tbergham...@google.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2016 1:34 PM
To: Pavel Labath ; Mikhail Filimonov
Cc: lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
Subject: Re: [lldb-dev] lldb-server stripped binary size
As Pavel mentioned the unreasonable large size for lldb-server is caused by
the fact that we are relying on the liker to remove the unused code and it
can't do too good job because we have lot of unreasonable dependencies.
The size difference between arm and arrahc64 caused by several reason:
* On
18 PM
To: Mikhail Filimonov
Cc: lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
Subject: Re: [lldb-dev] lldb-server stripped binary size: AArch64 ~16Mb vs ARM
~9 Mb
Hi,
so the problem here is that we are currently relying on the linker to remove
code that we don't need, and it can't always do a good job
Hi,
so the problem here is that we are currently relying on the linker to
remove code that we don't need, and it can't always do a good job in
figuring out which code is not used due to complex dependencies. So,
innocent-looking changes in the code can pull in lots of transitive
dependencies, even
Hello, fellow developers and congratulations with long awaited 3.8 Release.
I wonder why AArch64 stripped binary of lldb-server built from [3.8 Release]
RC3 source is so much bigger than its ARM counterpart.
See the numbers:
16318632 Feb 29 22:41 lldb-server-3.8.0-aarch64
9570916 Feb 29 22:23 ll
