Striking gold in binutils

Posted Mar 27, 2008 7:17 UTC (Thu) by mjthayer (guest, #39183)
In reply to: Striking gold in binutils by nix
Parent article: Striking gold in binutils

Is this really the case?  I once tried hacking up ld.so to do the lookup backwards (it is
actually possible without doing a strlen for every comparison) and I could see no difference
in performance, based on loading OpenOffice with both linkers and enabling the built-in linker
profiling.  Of course, I may have messed up something else in the process...

ld.so is different beast

Posted Mar 27, 2008 9:43 UTC (Thu) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] (1 responses)

You can read about what goes on there in Drepper's article. Scroll down to "The GNU-style hash table".

ld.so is different beast

Posted Mar 27, 2008 10:16 UTC (Thu) by mjthayer (guest, #39183) [Link]

That article was the reason I tried it in the first place :)

Striking gold in binutils

Posted Mar 27, 2008 10:46 UTC (Thu) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] (2 responses)

Hm, interesting. I'll try it at some point (probably with part of KDE: OOo takes too damn long
to build ;} ) and see if I can make it go slow ;}

Striking gold in binutils

Posted Mar 27, 2008 11:05 UTC (Thu) by mjthayer (guest, #39183) [Link] (1 responses)

No need to rebuild anything to try out a new dynamic linker, methinks...

Striking gold in binutils

Posted Mar 28, 2008 21:27 UTC (Fri) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

I need to rebuild it to add back a non DT_GNU_HASH :)