[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:0.055 / U:11.748 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site