joel.sherrill at OARcorp.com
Tue Sep 9 10:55:47 UTC 2003
Fabio Degiovanni - Eicas wrote:
> Thank you very much for your help, I appreciated it very much.
> I need to solve compleatly the problem, so I have some more questions:
> -you told me that most likely the .bss section is not included in the
> output image. I presume that this happen always because the
> uninitialised data are created run-time. Am I right?
Since it is uninitialized variables, it is really just reserved space in
memory which is reserved in the linker script.
I have also seen linker scripts with minor errors which resulted in
extra large bss sizes being reported. Is
your linker script in the primary tree or custom?
> -you told me that I must have some huge arrays declared in that code,
> but I presumed that my bss section would have been much smaller. I
> tried to do sparc-rtems-size to every object files and than I summed
> up and I found:
> text data bss dec hex
> 117506 181240 4816 303562 4a1ca
> Is the difference between the object files size and executable file
> only due to the static linking of rtems libraries? In this case it
> seems that the umount of uninitilalised data is introduced by the
> rtems libraries. What's the difference between doing sparc-rtems-size
> on the executable and on the object files?
The libraries just like you think. I don't think there is 9806288 -
4816 in uninitialized data in
any of the libraries. You are only pulling in about another 100K of
code but getting 9.4 MB
I think there might be a linker script file mistake in this case. Which
one are you using?
Also look at the symbol table sorted by size (sparc-rtems-nm --size-sort
and see what's so big.
> Thank you very much
> Fabio Degiovanni
> Joel Sherrill wrote:
>> gregory.menke at gsfc.nasa.gov wrote:
>>> Fabio Degiovanni - Eicas writes:
>>> > Dear Sirs,
>>> > thank you very much for your answer, you have to
>>> > apologize me, but I mistook the question. What happens to me is
>>> that the > executable is smaller than what sparc-rtems-size returns.
>>> > To explain better:
>>> > -ls -l HISA returns 1869954
>>> > -sparc-rtems-size HISA returns
>>> > text data bss dec hex filename
>>> > 231488 183040 9806288 10220816 9bf510 HISA
>>> > > I understood well your explanation about the possibility that
>>> the output > file is bigger than the sum of the .text, .data and
>>> .bss sections, but I > cannot understand why my output file is
>>> smaller than the sum of the > ..text, .data and .bss sections.
>>> Most likely the .bss section is not included in the output image.
>> Correct. And yikes!! You must have some huge arrays declared in that
More information about the users