3 ms·

Speaking from heavy experimentation and experience, [0] glibc has some more optimized routines but musl has significantly less bloat. If you are haphazardly cal

Speaking from heavy experimentation and experience, [0] glibc has some more optimized routines but musl has significantly less bloat. If you are haphazardly calling libc functions left and right for everything and have a generally unoptimized code base, your code may fare better better with glibc. But musl’s smaller codebase is a win for faster startup and micro optimizations otherwise - and that’s without lto where it stands to gain more. [0]: https://neosmart.net/blog/a-high-performance-cross-platform-tac-rewrite/ https://neosmart.net/blog/a-high-performance-cross-platform-... Edit: Sorry, the correct link is this one: https://neosmart.net/blog/using-simd-acceleration-in-rust-to-create-the-worlds-fastest-tac/ https://neosmart.net/blog/using-simd-acceleration-in-rust-to...

jart 3y ago
If you want an optimized Musl, try Cosmopolitan in `make toolchain MODE=tinylinux`, since it's based on Musl, and its string routines go 2x faster.
- ComputerGuru 3y ago
  I don’t think that was around back then but I can add it to the backlog of things to try for next round. Does that play nice with rust? Presumably I’d have to at least build the standard library from scratch (which I’d want to do against musl as a separate benchmark anyway since it’s now a single environment variable away). (Not that the codebase makes much string function usage.)
  - jart 3y ago
    It should if everything is static and you're only targeting Linux.
scns 3y ago
> in addition to its direct usage of AVX2 functions and types, it also made a call to the BZHI and LZCNT intrinsics/asm instructions – which rustc/llvm do not recognize as being supported via the avx2 feature! So although (to the best of this developer’s knowledge) there does not exist a processor on the face of this planet that supports AVX2 but doesn’t support BZHI and LZCNT Looks like a "bug" or better put needed enhancement to LLVM.

jart 3y ago

If you want an optimized Musl, try Cosmopolitan in `make toolchain MODE=tinylinux`, since it's based on Musl, and its string routines go 2x faster.

ComputerGuru 3y ago
I don’t think that was around back then but I can add it to the backlog of things to try for next round. Does that play nice with rust? Presumably I’d have to at least build the standard library from scratch (which I’d want to do against musl as a separate benchmark anyway since it’s now a single environment variable away). (Not that the codebase makes much string function usage.)
- jart 3y ago
  It should if everything is static and you're only targeting Linux.

scns 3y ago

> in addition to its direct usage of AVX2 functions and types, it also made a call to the BZHI and LZCNT intrinsics/asm instructions – which rustc/llvm do not recognize as being supported via the avx2 feature! So although (to the best of this developer’s knowledge) there does not exist a processor on the face of this planet that supports AVX2 but doesn’t support BZHI and LZCNT Looks like a "bug" or better put needed enhancement to LLVM.