This is the mail archive of the libc-help@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On 7/17/2012 4:22 PM, Judd Montgomery wrote:Yes. My hope is to find a patch I can recompile glibc source packages with.
You've become your own distribution, and as such you must pay careful attention to the compiler and binary utilities you used to compile glibc.
I forgot about that, thanks.I compiled glibc with the following: $ env CFLAGS='-O2 -U_FORTIFY_SOURCE -fno-stack-protector' ../../src/$VERSION/configure --enable-omitfp --prefix=/opt/$VERSION --enable-add-ons && make && sudo make install
You should be running `make check' to ensure your build and environment are working.
I don't have 2.16 compiled at the moment, but I do have git compiled from late last week.I compiled a test program with: $ export VERSION=glibc-2.13; gcc -Wall -Xlinker -rpath=/opt/$VERSION/lib -Xlinker -I/opt/$VERSION/lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 loop.c -o loop.13 $ export VERSION=glibc-2.12.2; gcc -Wall -Xlinker -rpath=/opt/$VERSION/lib -Xlinker -I/opt/$VERSION/lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 loop.c -o loop.12
How does this compare to 2.16?
real 0m9.317s user 0m9.310s sys 0m0.000s
real 0m10.032s user 0m9.480s sys 0m0.000s
The x86_64 support has multiple string functions optimized for different processor variants.How do I tell? This is a 64-bit Intel machine. I also have AMD 64-bit to test with and preliminary testing showed it was slower as well, but I didn't test much on it.
What is the actual implementation that was selected at runtime?
If you step into the function which is the final routine selected to perform the string operation?Is this what you are asking?
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |