investigating RAM usage with nm / diff. between"nm"and"size" ?

[heinricg@esiee.fr]

-------------------
> <heinricg@esiee.fr> writes:
> 
> > I'm trying to use the nm command in order to understand how a
program
> > makes use of RAM and how to reduce RAM requirements. My program is
> > supposed to be embedded, so RAM is very limited.
> > 
> > Using, the nm command to list symbols in the program, the last
symbol
> > in the .bss section occurs at address 0xd0fe8. This also matches
the
> > last address in the section reported by the linker map.
> > 
> > The .bss section starts at 0xd0000, so that should mean my program
> > uses 4072 bytes of RAM (?).
> > 
> > However, my concern is that when I use the size command, it
reports
> > only 3336 bytes in the .bss section.
> > 
> > Do you know why these differ?
> 
> What tells you that the .bss section starts at 0xd0000?  That is not
a
> typical address for the .bss section; the .bss section typically
> starts just after the end of the .data section, and thus is
typically
> not on a page boundary.
> 

oh, my mistake!
I forgot that the data section was located between 0xd0000 (the start
address of RAM on my board) and the beginning of the .bss section.
This way it makes more sense.

Thank you very much for your help,
Greg.