Conceptually, the new encoding emits the offsets and sizes as label differences between each two consecutive basic block begin and end label. When decoding, the offsets must be aggregated along with basic block sizes to calculate the final relative-to-function offsets of basic blocks.
This encoding uses smaller values compared to the existing one (offsets relative to function symbol).
Smaller values tend to occupy fewer bytes in ULEB128 encoding. As a result, we get about 25% reduction
in the size of the bb-address-map section (reduction from about 9MB to 7MB).
Just making sure, is it possible that there could be some padding between basic blocks which might not get accounted for in size calculations? I guess this is being done after the assembler has done its work so it should be fine?