Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 13:53:58 +0200 From: Erik Cederstrand <erik@cederstrand.dk> To: Tim Kientzle <tim@kientzle.com> Cc: freebsd-current FreeBSD <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [RFC] Un-staticise the toolchain Message-ID: <AF37B4BF-69D5-41D3-819A-0252911CBC89@cederstrand.dk> In-Reply-To: <A79EE48D-A2AC-4D35-B156-1F58D17F77DD@kientzle.com> References: <20120426093548.GR2358@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <20120426134140.GF14350@lo0.su> <CADLo838sdUT2e%2B7j8vCyOmDithLsh3kwDd_z04dWaPoiMphPDQ@mail.gmail.com> <4F99ACF9.2050609@infracaninophile.co.uk> <CADLo83_sr=13H=9nnrdge0jJaOh5Bk2N_gg=Gf-uYhwM8jm7Xg@mail.gmail.com> <42D8809D-0E99-47A5-802F-71991B5B0B8D@cederstrand.dk> <A79EE48D-A2AC-4D35-B156-1F58D17F77DD@kientzle.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Den 01/05/2012 kl. 07.52 skrev Tim Kientzle: >=20 > On Apr 30, 2012, at 6:41 AM, Erik Cederstrand wrote: >>=20 >> Can anyone explain to me why the dynamically linked version is = significantly slower? What are the extra steps involved compared to a = statically linked binary? >=20 > At the risk of dramatically over-simplifying=85. >=20 > When a static binary is started by the kernel, it does the following: > * Initializes some libc internals. > * Calls main. >=20 > When a dynamic binary is started by the kernel, it does the following: > * Initializes some libc internals. > * For every dynamic library referenced by this executable: > - loads the dynamic library into memory > - fixes up references > * Calls main >=20 > The process of loading the required libraries and fixing up references > can be quite time-consuming. Thanks for the explanation. In the previous 'make index' benchmark by = Chris, make is called very often, which means the dynamic libraries = should already be loaded into memory after the first run, right? Which = means the extra time is being spent fixing up references? Erik=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AF37B4BF-69D5-41D3-819A-0252911CBC89>