USE_MMAP
Krister Walfridsson
cato@df.lth.se
Thu Jul 1 00:00:00 GMT 1999
On 12 Jun 1999, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> I didn't think anybody used USE_MMAP. The last time I fiddled around
> with it (it was Ken who wrote it originally), the resulting linker was
> actually slower, so it didn't seem worth pushing it (this was on
> SunOS). mmap always sounds good, but I don't think there is any
> inherent reason for it to be faster than file I/O, and BFD doesn't
> need any of the other advantages of using it. Does the NetBSD
> toolchain run faster because of the use of USE_MMAP?
I don't know. The reason we enabled it was that our m68k ports couldn't
strip kernels with debug info due to the default process memory limit
being to low. USE_MMAP solved it (and mmap sounds like a reasonable thing
to use anyhow.)
> This could be fixed in a few possible ways. Not using USE_MMAP would
> be the simplest. Copying the minisymbols into an malloc storage block
> if USE_MMAP is defined would work, though it would not be very
> efficient. Otherwise, I think the interface would have to be changed
> somehow.
Hmm... I'll inspect the other binutils programs to see if any other
is affected before I try to fix it...
/Krister
More information about the Binutils
mailing list