FreeBSD-STABLE Mailing List , brooks@freebsd.org Subject: Re: performance regressions in 15.0 Message-ID: References: <18FB2858-5CBB-4B7A-8089-224A58C6A160@yahoo.com> <20251208035105.2313075d@rimwks.local> <202512080745.5B87jeIN025646@critter.freebsd.dk> List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-stable List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <202512080745.5B87jeIN025646@critter.freebsd.dk> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=4.0.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.2 (2025-08-27) on tom.home X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; TAGGED_RCPT(0.00)[] X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4dQ0PS2lQpz3K9R On Mon, Dec 08, 2025 at 07:45:40AM +0000, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > -------- > Konstantin Belousov writes: > > > JFYI, shared llvm libs are required for lot of things. The incomplete > > list of examples that I am aware of are dri drivers and ispc Intel compiler. > > But installing the shared libs for those other users, does not mean we have > to link the compiler itself against the shared lib ? Sure, we do not have to. But there are other benefits from linking the libraries dynamically. E.g. the same (?) user shed crocodile tears over memory usage by 64bit system, and linking libllvm dynamically exactly reduces the memory profile by sharing significant part of text for cc, lld, and minor binutils.