Ralf Wildenhues <ralf.wildenh...@gmx.de> writes: > Trying out gold (no LTO) on GCC's cc1, a log shows that the single > biggest part (20%) of user time for such a medium sized program may be > spent in SHA1 computation for the build id. I think the SHA1 code in > libiberty would benefit from an SSE implementation, such as the one > found in git or described on <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SHA-1>.
I think that would be great. Since you bring it up, I copied the default of "sha1" from GNU ld, but actually I don't think that is a very good default. While a build ID has some obvious uses, I have a hard time seeing why it matters that the build ID is cryptographically secure. I think we should consider adding a new crc32 or crc64 option and making that the default. The sha1 option would remain for those uses where cryptographic security is important. Ian
