Re: Some initial thoughts about 2.4
- From: Sander Vesik <sander_traveling yahoo co uk>
- To: Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com>, Daniel Egger <degger fhm edu>
- Cc: GTK Devel <gtk-devel-list gnome org>
- Subject: Re: Some initial thoughts about 2.4
- Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 22:45:30 +0000 (GMT)
--- Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com> wrote: >
> Daniel Egger <degger fhm edu> writes:
> > Am Mit, 2003-01-01 um 18.49 schrieb Sander Vesik:
> > > I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this - while its true that
> > > you want the reordering to be architecture speific to an extent
> > > (so you take page size into account) I doubt that you'll find a
> > > usefull reordering that took either the tlb size or associativity
> > > into acocunt.
> > Exactly that's my point. This optimisation would have to be per CPU and
> > OS and not per architecture, which means that it cannot be done globally
> > for any architecture people are not compiling Gtk+/Glib themselves for.
> Note that my original mention of function-reordering was as something
> that could be done on the OS/tools side to make GTK+ startup times
> better, not something to do as a GTK+/GLib improvement.
I have patches that allow you to pass in a location for a "reorder mapfile"
to configure for specific libraries - with such it becomes entirely something
optional, if you have a mapfile you want to use and your OS/toolchain (people
using gnu ld on solaris are in the same situation as those using it on linux
afaik) has such support, then you just pass in the location to the mapfile and
function reordering happens, otherwise no.
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
] [Thread Prev