From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 26 13:09:27 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26EA816A4CE for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2003 13:09:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from basement.kutulu.org (pcp03610121pcs.longhl01.md.comcast.net [68.49.239.235]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E440143F85 for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2003 13:09:24 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kutulu@kutulu.org) Received: from wombat.localnet (wombat.localnet [192.168.69.3]) by basement.kutulu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C181A904; Wed, 26 Nov 2003 16:09:24 -0500 (EST) Received: by wombat.localnet (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 14079B855; Wed, 26 Nov 2003 16:08:43 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 16:08:42 -0500 From: Michael Edenfield To: "M. Warner Losh" Message-ID: <20031126210842.GM15294@wombat.localnet> Mail-Followup-To: "M. Warner Losh" , drosih@rpi.edu, freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: <20031126052320.GH15294@wombat.localnet> <20031126144357.GK15294@wombat.localnet> <20031126.125138.133913249.imp@bsdimp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="8m/hfNLtAhX2NvnO" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031126.125138.133913249.imp@bsdimp.com> X-Mailer: Mutt http://www.mutt.org/ X-Accept-Language: en X-PGP-Key: http://www.kutulu.org/pgp/kutulu.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 1CE0 3C31 7013 D529 406D 37DC 09CC CD84 A46C 878F User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1i cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 40% slowdown with dynamic /bin/sh X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 21:09:27 -0000 --8m/hfNLtAhX2NvnO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable * M. Warner Losh [031126 14:51]: > In message: <20031126144357.GK15294@wombat.localnet> > Michael Edenfield writes: > : They were on a single CPU Athlon 500 with 320MB of RAM. >=20 > 320MB is not enough RAM not to swap. >=20 > However, having said that, I think everybody realizes the following: >=20 > 1) Dynamic linking is slower. > 2) Speed improvements in this area are possible, as > demonstrated by other projects. > 3) PIC code is slower than non-PIC code, in general, and also > gcc runs about 5-10% slower depending on if you are running > out of a shared library or a static one. shared libraries > must use PIC code (at this time). > 4) People like to complain. Just for the record, I've been running WITH_DYNAMICROOT since nearly the day it came out and don't *notice* any problems. Mostly because the noise of dynamic linking overhead gets lost in the noise of "my hardware sucks so bad I have to take a vacation during buildworlds." My startup takes upwards of 5 minutes anyway, another 45 seconds won't even make me blink. I'm certainly not complaining about the performance :) I only posted those numbers to: 1) Give real world numbers, not "interesting but unrealistic numbers" 2) Show that even worst-case numbers weren't on the level of 40% slowdown. 3) Hopefully help someone figure out where to best improve the dynamic link= er. --Mike --8m/hfNLtAhX2NvnO Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE/xRZaCczNhKRsh48RAuI9AJ40ZYyVt1sDaIFS4hAxGEEeVnbEQwCfXgTc QQU3NeIXq77XplpKWNA+1qs= =WlvR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --8m/hfNLtAhX2NvnO--