* Performance datapoint - impact of static libs
@ 2011-07-15 13:31 Richard Purdie
2011-07-15 13:37 ` Phil Blundell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Richard Purdie @ 2011-07-15 13:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: openembedded-core
Before:
real 104m1.135s
user 415m57.560s
sys 61m31.180s
With "--disable-static" being passed to configure (changes below):
real 99m46.645s
user 383m32.390s
sys 60m42.170s
So static libs add an extra ~30mins of processing (7%) and ~5 mins to
the overall build time. Not as much of a gain as I'd have liked but
interesting none the less.
The changes were effectively:
DISABLESTATIC = "--disable-static"
DISABLESTATIC_pn-sqlite3-native = ""
DISABLESTATIC_pn-openssl = ""
DISABLESTATIC_pn-openssl-native = ""
DISABLESTATIC_pn-qemu-native = ""
EXTRA_OECONF_append = " ${DISABLESTATIC}"
in local.conf with a patch to the openjade-native recipe to not install
the .a file using oe_libinstall and a patch to apmd to fix a libtool
related compiling bug in its makefile.
Cheers,
Richard
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread* Re: Performance datapoint - impact of static libs
2011-07-15 13:31 Performance datapoint - impact of static libs Richard Purdie
@ 2011-07-15 13:37 ` Phil Blundell
2011-07-20 14:50 ` Richard Purdie
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Phil Blundell @ 2011-07-15 13:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
> So static libs add an extra ~30mins of processing (7%) and ~5 mins to
> the overall build time. Not as much of a gain as I'd have liked but
> interesting none the less.
Do you know how many packages actually respect the --disable-static
flag? I don't think (e)glibc does, for example, which is a bit of a
shame since it obviously has one of the largest build times.
p.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: Performance datapoint - impact of static libs
2011-07-15 13:37 ` Phil Blundell
@ 2011-07-20 14:50 ` Richard Purdie
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Richard Purdie @ 2011-07-20 14:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
On Fri, 2011-07-15 at 14:37 +0100, Phil Blundell wrote:
> > So static libs add an extra ~30mins of processing (7%) and ~5 mins to
> > the overall build time. Not as much of a gain as I'd have liked but
> > interesting none the less.
>
> Do you know how many packages actually respect the --disable-static
> flag? I don't think (e)glibc does, for example, which is a bit of a
> shame since it obviously has one of the largest build times.
I did a quick search over the resulting build looking for image/*.a
files and it seems a lot of the system did respect it. There were some
significant exceptions (eglibc, boost, openssl spring to mind) but in
general it looked pretty good.
Cheers,
Richard
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-07-20 14:55 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-07-15 13:31 Performance datapoint - impact of static libs Richard Purdie
2011-07-15 13:37 ` Phil Blundell
2011-07-20 14:50 ` Richard Purdie
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox