[OpenWrt-Devel] [RFT] toolchain/musl: update to version 1.1.21

[Christian Lamparter]

On Wednesday, January 23, 2019 6:54:11 PM CET Christian Lamparter wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 23, 2019 2:26:20 PM CET Koen Vandeputte wrote:
> > Hi Christian,
> > 
> > fwiw, I've been using every musl git bump up to this release on my 
> > devices offshore. It has been running on ~65 devices covering multiple 
> > arches. (armv6k-mpcore, armv7, mips24, mips74, x86_64)
> > 
> > Looks really ok to me, and I statistically do see a drop in weird 
> > one-time issues compared to 1.1.20
> > 
> > Concerning the patch itself:
> > 
> > You probably will need to rebase and refresh the musl patches based on 
> > the latest master state. I also created the bump in my staging tree when 
> > 1.1.21 it was released, and I have an additional patch refreshed, which 
> > is a delta to yours.
> You are right, I had a version bump in my tree that updated the offsets of
> 110-read_timezone_from_fs.patch. With it the patches are identical (apart
> from the commit message).
> 
> > Other than that:
> > 
> > Tested-by: Koen Vandeputte <koen.vandeputte at ncentric.com>
> 
> I'm a bit worried about:
> "This release makes improvements with respect to default thread stack
> size, including increasing the default from 80k to 128k, increasing
> the default guard size from 4k to 8k, and allowing the default to be
> increased via ELF headers so that programs that need larger stacks can
> be build without source-level changes, using just LDFLAGS." and it's
> impact on LOWMEM devices. Currently, I'm looking into making some
> "before and after" comparisions before moving on.

Results are in. On most of my OpenWrt devices (which have 64 MiB and
more) there is hardly any change in the memory consumption. So I focused
just on my most memory starved device: a WD My Range Extender AR9344/AR7010(ath79)
which has a MemTotal (/proc/meminfo) of 26900 KiB.

On this device the RAM consumption went up when it was running the proposed
musl-1.1.21 by 44 KiB (or about a extra 4 KiB page per process). Whereas the
uncompressed squash image size slightly decreased by about a 1 KIB. 
The RAM changes are almost indistinguishable from the noise and there's a
tiny ROM size advantage... But more importantly, there hasn't been any
worriesome  reports on the ML or updates on musl's git. I do think this 
is ready, but the question is, should we add it "now" so it will be in 19.01?

I know that Hauke's mentioned in his 19.01 plans back in 2018 November:
<http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/openwrt-devel/2018-November/014526.html>
That musl could be upgraded to 1.1.21? But back then, musl 1.1.21 was
just on the roadmap.

Regards,
Christian



_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel