[lkml]   [2010]   [Apr]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Downsides to madvise/fadvise(willneed) for application startup
    On Apr 16, 2010, at 7:41 AM, Andi Kleen wrote:

    > Zan Lynx <> writes:
    >> On 4/15/10 4:53 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
    >>> This just isn't an interesting case. World-wide, the number of people
    >>> who compile their own web browser and execute it from the file which ld
    >>> produced is, umm, seven.
    >> Gentoo users? Linux From Scratch?
    > "make install" tends to copy. I am not aware of any Makefiles
    > that link directly to /usr/bin, and usually that wouldn't work
    > anyways because of permissions. copy fixes the problem.

    ... and those people who are executing the binary out of the build directory are probably running the regression test (i.e., "make; make check") and on most developer machines, if they're lucky they have enough memory that the executable will still be in their page cache. :-)

    This being said, on modern file systems (i.e., btrfs, ext4, xfs, et. al), delayed allocation should mostly hide this problem; and if not, and the linker can estimate in advance how big the resulting binary will be, it could be modified to use the fallocate(2) system call.

    -- Ted

     \ /
      Last update: 2010-04-16 14:25    [W:0.022 / U:1.848 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site