Re: [PATCH] Start of compat32.h (again)

[Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>]

Hi!

>    Actually, it tends to nullify the bloat cost and then make it few
>    percent faster... For most of spec2000 modulo two or three cache-bound
>    tests that are 50% slower :-(.
> 
> How about some test where relocations come into play?
> spec2000 is a bad example, it's just crunch code.

time ./configure might be a good test...

> Most systems spend their time running quick small executables over and
> over, and in such cases relocation overhead shows up very strongly.

Really? What workload besides configure does many small programs?

> This is why I asked for fork, exec et al. latency figures for 32-bit
> vs 64-bit on x86_64 but I've been informed in private email that
> nobody can send me numbers due to NDAs.
> 
> I still think making the simple programs like ls, cat, bash et
> al. 64-bit in a dist is a bad idea.

Agreed for ls and cat, but I do not think it hurts for bash...

								Pavel
-- 
Worst form of spam? Adding advertisment signatures ala sourceforge.net.
What goes next? Inserting advertisment *into* email?