Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Downsides to madvise/fadvise(willneed) for application startup | From | Theodore Tso <> | Date | Fri, 16 Apr 2010 08:23:17 -0400 |
| |
On Apr 16, 2010, at 7:41 AM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Zan Lynx <zlynx@acm.org> 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
| |