3 ms·
This is a linux kernel compilation benchmark comparing build tools of amd64-glibc, x32-glibc and x32-musl. x32-glibc is about 10% faster than amd64-glibc, but
by ysleepy 5y ago
This is a linux kernel compilation benchmark comparing build tools of amd64-glibc, x32-glibc and x32-musl.
x32-glibc is about 10% faster than amd64-glibc, but surprisingly x32-musl is 40% slower than the glibc time.
Author mentions that it might just be stdout buffering, implicitly done by glibc but not by musl hinted at by 54min of kernel time vs 7min with glibc.
I'm actually more interested in memory usage.
- pantalaimon 5y ago> I'm actually more interested in memory usage. CERN found that X32 saves between 10% to 20% memory, they found similar gains in execution speed due to better cache utilization - https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/pub/ITSDC/ProfAndOptExperimentsApps/x32.pdf https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/pub/ITSDC/ProfAndOptExperimentsA... - https://www.researchgate.net/publication/270980212_Evaluation_of_X32-ABI_in_the_context_of_LHC_applications https://www.researchgate.net/publication/270980212_Evaluatio...
- otabdeveloper4 5y agoLast I checked (which was something like 8 years ago) musl didn't support VDSO properly. (Meaning time() and gettimeofday() turn into kernel syscalls instead of a simple memory access.) Lots of nuance here that can have far-reaching consequences.