[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150527160955.1bda26cf@vostro>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 16:09:55 +0300
From: Timo Teras <timo.teras@....fi>
To: Alexander Monakov <amonakov@...ras.ru>
Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Question re: dynamic linking in musl
On Wed, 27 May 2015 16:01:50 +0300 (MSK)
Alexander Monakov <amonakov@...ras.ru> wrote:
> On Wed, 27 May 2015, Alex Dowad wrote:
> > > Can you also provide exact figures? For example your callgrind
> > > logs? Or just
> > > 'time' statistics for executables that spend much time in the
> > > dynamic linker.
> > Callgrind data attached.
>
> Oh. The profile makes it evident that most of the libraries
> lack .gnu.hash, and the lookup is almost always using SysV lookup.
> With many dependencies SysV lookup is slower: in my testing with
> Clang/LLVM I got something like 420 ms (compared to 240 ms unpatched
> or 110 ms patched musl with .gnu.hash lookup).
>
> I'm not familiar with Alpine. Hopefully someone else can chime in
> whether .gnu.hash is deliberately disabled.
We have not touched, so we are using the gcc default. Which apparently
then is sysv only (bummer).
I wonder if it's better to have both, or gnu only?
/Timo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
