On 2020-05-06 13:56, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Hey Aurelien,
>
> On Sun, May 03, 2020 at 11:53:35PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> >
> >One solution for this would be to ship the optimized library in the same
> >package as the default library. Now this is not acceptable for embedded
> >systems as they might not need that library and can't remove it. This is
> >even more problematic if we need to add more optimized libraries. I guess
> >this might be the case for arm64 as there are many new extensions in the
> >pipe.
>
> ACK. It's a problem to ship the different things in separate
> packages. If it's really a problem for smaller systems to have all the
> variants because of size, is there maybe another way to do things? How
> about keeping the existing libc and have an extra package
> ("libc-optimised") with all the optimised versions *and* the basic
> version, and have it provide/replace/conflict libc6?
>
> (/me prepares to be ambarrassed as you point out the obvious flaw I'm
> missing...)
I guess that the provide/replace/conflict libc6 will just prevent
installation of foreign libc6 packages, basically making this optimized
package useless in the multiarch context.
OTOH, what is the drawback of having GCC defaulting to -moutline-atomics?
It will improve performance on many more packages than only glibc, and
is way easier to implement overall. It also means users has nothing to
do to get additional performances.
--
Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B
aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net
