From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/1754 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: boris brezillon Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: ldso : dladdr support Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2012 09:42:38 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20120811230536.GQ27715@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20120817053934.GS27715@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <50311776.9040802@gmail.com> <20120820020626.GD27715@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <503233A8.8000604@gmail.com> <50324A60.7040206@gmail.com> <20120823213937.GS27715@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20120823222113.GT27715@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <50372D59.7090604@gmail.com> <20120824183850.GH27715@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1345880577 28063 80.91.229.3 (25 Aug 2012 07:42:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2012 07:42:57 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-1755-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Sat Aug 25 09:42:58 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1T5B1A-0002DY-S0 for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Sat, 25 Aug 2012 09:42:52 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 15382 invoked by uid 550); 25 Aug 2012 07:42:50 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 15374 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2012 07:42:50 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=ZyHpsyubcW27V2nprlNE8pk2YBWkCjI8MwYUqb5NWvc=; b=fm/bJUv1uYiGsPE/e/qcEA+Y3w2o7xVRc5RmFHW9INh5ZO7xEK1i9nvoaAogrizl3E dsGy8ov3je9Irdd60xhsK7WKHq+Q0m6Jjwt53sSeXJgkdqWiF5+8occmWCTxjiDvQBp4 tqF2Dlm5az/8bwslOxndDV8Y6ZTfpI/9Qk06jnMFX+/m9RZV2sO84/1x6SpEtvWlGmuE tZ1zF7sHbcFGoTTE5HeelO82Uq1pSIQ5XfCIdmVc9UxhMQ6ypUtJOcBv4RAgc+DTYi9j 8tB5Wola6waU01UVJgo1Xa9Ix/PuUjyYroZtfahv0qJhjjPlhjdYtP5ZI8tbPIGclk77 APmA== In-Reply-To: <20120824183850.GH27715@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:1754 Archived-At: 2012/8/24 Rich Felker : > On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 09:29:29AM +0200, musl wrote: >> I tested it and it works well. > > Is there anything I changed that you think might be better done a > different way? No, but I'm not an expert in size/speed code optimization. > >> My tests are based on small libs (with a small set of shared symbols). >> I mixed libs with gnu hash and sysv hash. >> Tried to resolve symbols via dlsym. >> >> Have you tested it on big libraries ? > > No, just very minimal testing. > >> Do you want me to do some specific tests ? > > Actually, the main thing I'm interested in is whether the bloom filter > is ever beneficial. I took it out trying to streamline the code and > shaved about 8% off the lookup time for symbols in the main program, > but I didn't investigate how the change affects symbols not found in > the first file searched. Would you be interested in running some tests > to determine if it might be useful to try adding it back? I'll do some tests with multiple levels of big libraries : prog -> libtest -> libc -> libb -> liba ... How do you get your perf results (specific tools, time measurement inside libc code, time measurement in main program, ...)? > > Since it seems to be working/non-broken right now, I'll probably go > ahead and commit soon unless you find a major problem I've overlooked. > Then we can work on improving it once it's in the repo. I agree. > > Rich