28 GMT+01:00 Derek Buitenhuis >:
> >>
> >> On 3/17/2015 11:27 PM, Vadim Chugunov wrote:
> >> > I think I am bumping into the issue described here:
> >> > https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16598. The bug also
> has a
> >>
Hi,
I think I am bumping into the issue described here:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16598. The bug also has a
patch attached. What would it take to get someone to merge it?
Vadim
--
Dive into the Worl
Hi,
Is link-time dead code elimination via --function-sections +
-Wl,--gc-sections known to work on mingw?
--
Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server
from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Busine
I've tried both patches (fixed conditions in Kai's) and both eliminate
extraneous calls to VirtualProtect. However Kai's patch did not seem to
affect startup performance at all. DW's patch, on the other hand, also
gets rid of VirtualQuery', and that cuts down the startup time of my test
example
ikely to help.
>
> NB: I haven't tried this, but you have the setup to test it anyway. Also,
> this code snippet only fixes 2 of the 3 places that use
> PAGE_EXECUTE_WRITECOPY. Remember to change the comparison in
> mark_section_writable() as well.
>
> FWIW,
> dw
>
VirtualProtect() per relocation entry.
I am not entirely sure how this situation comes about, but here you go...
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 1:01 AM, Vadim Chugunov wrote:
> Hi,
> I am trying to figure out the cause of a slow application startup, and the
> evidence I have so far, points t
Hi,
I am trying to figure out the cause of a slow application startup, and the
evidence I have so far, points to mingw's _pei386_runtime_relocator()
routine as the culprit. When I start my app under debugger, I see this
function calling VirtualProtect() about a zillion times in a row.
Looking at
