On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 15:49 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 09:40 -0500, Mark Hatle wrote: > > It would be interesting to determine first off, if there is anywhere pseudo > > should be running that it currently isn't. And second if this is simply > > due to > > LD_PRELOAD time, or if enabling the jump table is the culprit. > > > > One potential optimization, when PSEUDO_DISABLE=1 is to only setup the jump > > table entries for fork/exec items. > > Agreed, I don't know where the time is being spent exactly at this > point. I do know we execute an absolute ton of exec/fork calls so > removing any overhead from them will improve our speed though. This > change means do_configure won't run with pseudo enabled for example > which is a very exec heavy task.
So we did some tests, I thought I'd share the results: base build config: real 38m12.356s user 236m4.710s sys 39m38.180s adding in the psuedo patches but not enabling (effectively jitter measurement): real 38m13.034s user 235m44.250s sys 39m6.150s enabling the lazy linking: real 38m16.121s user 236m1.300s sys 39m45.860s Enable PSEUDO_UNLOAD: real 35m46.281s user 233m56.750s sys 37m51.400s So the big win isn't the linking, its the unloading of pseudo when we don't need it... Cheers, Richard _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
