Recent Features
| |||||||||||||
FatELF: universal binaries for LinuxFatELF: universal binaries for LinuxPosted Nov 4, 2009 16:20 UTC (Wed) by Darkmere (subscriber, #53695)Parent article: FatELF: universal binaries for Linux
For me, I do not think FatELF would solve the problems with regards to optimizations. Let us take the more "modern" architectures ( and disregard the need for "i686 without CMOV" ) we have things like Atom(ipia) vs. i686 where the two have vastly different behaviour wrt. performance. Right now we don't even know which way will be dominant in the future, but a fair guess would be to see that atom-like architectures become more common in the future, and I don't think the dynamic linker will be a good place for this kind of logic.
Then again, I also believe in link time optimization for gcc and the tooth fairy.
(Log in to post comments)
FatELF: universal binaries for Linux Posted Nov 5, 2009 18:16 UTC (Thu) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]
Support for -ftooth-fairy was added to GCC a few weeks ago.
FatELF: universal binaries for Linux Posted Nov 6, 2009 20:02 UTC (Fri) by Darkmere (subscriber, #53695) [Link]
Only things left are full system profile guided optimizations (Buildsystem issue I suspect) and working link time optimization (For things like firefox. -fwhole-program and similar are. interesting.)
FatELF: universal binaries for Linux Posted Nov 6, 2009 20:36 UTC (Fri) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]
Well, the point of -fwhopr is to make LTO optimizations practical even for
very large programs, without needing insane amounts of memory. So that's been added too.
FatELF: universal binaries for Linux Posted Nov 7, 2009 2:28 UTC (Sat) by Darkmere (subscriber, #53695) [Link]
Oh, seems they really did add my -ponies then!
|
|||||||||||||