prelink performance gains

[Josh Boyer]

On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Jan Kratochvil
<jan.kratochvil at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 19:50:44 +0200, Simo Sorce wrote:
>> Many tools need to juggle the fact these binaries have been changed, and
>> make checkers more complex and prone to faults.
>
> So let's build the whole system with -O0 and we can throw away most of
> compilers and half of debuggers, which are all needlessly complex and prone to
> faults due to -O2.  Do we want to build simple system or good system?
>
>
>> In general prelink makes things more complex for negligible gains, its
>> worth is highly questionable.
>
> I am aware of it, I have spent a lot of time making tools prelink compatible.
> But even compilers have very complex parts for negligible gains.
>
>
>> I just hope you are not saying that there is a doubt there are
>> disadvantages.
>
> I really have not yet seen any valid one.
>
>
>> The real question here is whether advantages supersede disadvantges, and
>> given the only advantage seem to be performance and it is lost in noise,
>
> I would not say it is lost in noise but let's say it is not big.

The definition of negligible (the word you keep using to describe the
performance benefits is:

"so small or unimportant as to be not worth considering; insignificant."

That is exactly the same as "lost in noise".

Perhaps you want to use some word other than negligible to describe
the performance benefits, because right now your argumentation is very
confusing.

josh