From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri May  5 23:32:10 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from sharmas.dhs.org (c62443-a.frmt1.sfba.home.com [24.0.69.165])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D1FB37B908
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri,  5 May 2000 23:32:07 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from adsharma@sharmas.dhs.org)
Received: (from adsharma@localhost)
	by sharmas.dhs.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id XAA27328
	for freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org; Fri, 5 May 2000 23:31:42 -0700
Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 23:31:42 -0700
From: Arun Sharma <adsharma@sharmas.dhs.org>
To: FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
Subject: Lazy binding
Message-ID: <20000505233142.A27312@sharmas.dhs.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.6i
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

Is there a strong reason why FreeBSD rtld uses lazy binding by default ?
In a multithreaded environment, this could make things pretty complex.
What if a thread holds locks and fails at runtime due to a missing
symbol ?

Also, is there a significant performance benefit to doing lazy binding ?

	-Arun


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message