[RFC PATCH 0/2] elfutils: don't use dlopen() for libebl modules
Omar Sandoval
osandov@osandov.com
Wed Jul 3 21:37:00 GMT 2019
On Wed, Jul 03, 2019 at 05:33:42PM -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> Hi -
>
> > [...]
> > My understanding of the benefit of separate modules is that we don't
> > need to link all backend modules into every elfutils binary. I did some
> > measurements to that end:
> >
> > Dynamic backends (status quo):
> > 44K ./libasm/libasm.so
> > 380K ./libdw/libdw.so
> > 120K ./libelf/libelf.so
> > 56K ./src/objdump
> >
> > Static backends (after this series):
> > 44K ./libasm/libasm.so
> > 668K ./libdw/libdw.so
> > 120K ./libelf/libelf.so
> > 348K ./src/objdump
>
> Assuming a dynamically linked objdump would be the same size as
> before, and that the libebl-* contents would only bloat libdw.so,
> and only by 300K, IMHO we should just go for it.
This is actually with dynamically linked binaries -- the size increase
is because we link libebl.a directly into all of the binaries in
addition to libdw.so:
objdump_LDADD = $(libasm) $(libebl) $(libdw) $(libelf) $(libeu) $(argp_LDADD)
More information about the Elfutils-devel
mailing list