On Mon, 2016-08-08 at 08:54 -0700, Ian Romanick wrote: > On 08/05/2016 07:05 PM, ⚛ wrote: > > > > On Sat, Aug 6, 2016 at 3:37 AM, Jan Vesely <jan.ves...@rutgers.edu> > > wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, 2016-08-06 at 02:42 +0200, Jan Ziak wrote: > > > > > > > > Mesa source code prior to this patch uses both RTLD_NOW and > > > > RTLD_LAZY. > > > > This patch removes all RTLD_NOW in favor of RTLD_LAZY. > > > > > > > > In comparison to early binding, lazy binding reduces CPU > > > > instruction > > > > count > > > > of small GL apps (e.g: glxinfo) by 6 million instructions. > > > > Larger apps won't notice the difference. > > > > > > this is IMO micro-optimization in the wrong place. RTLD_NOW also > > > guarantees that symbols were successfully resolved. Changing it > > > to lazy > > > may hide bugs by deferring failure to future point in the > > > execution. > > > > Question 1: Are you suggesting to replace current RTLD_LAZY in all > > locations with RTLD_NOW? > > > > Question 2: Exists there a reason for _not_ linking > > radeonsi_dri.so, > > swrastg_dri.so, etc, directly to Mesa's libGL.so? The Gallium > > *_dri.so libraries are the same inode on the filesystem. > > This is an intentional feature. This allows libGL and *_dri.so to be > installed from different versions. It also allows the possibility > for a > *_dri.so from outside the Mesa source tree.
Just out of curiosity, what is the motivation for using different _dri and mesa version? Are there license restrictions that prevent distributing mesa with custom _dri binaries? I know that virtualbox uses this approach, it breaks when guest distro updates mesa packages (until vbox-additions catch up). regards, Jan > > > > > Question 3: Isn't the current status quo (i.e: not linking > > radeonsi_dri.so directly to libGL.so) also a micro-optimization > > that > > can hide certain bugs? > > > > Question 4: Is it planned for *_dri.so belonging to Gallium/DRI > > _not_ > > to be mapped to the same inode on the filesystem in the future? If > > there is no such plan, what was the original point of having > > multiple > > _dri.so files mapped to the same inode? > > > > Thanks. > > > -- Jan Vesely <jan.ves...@rutgers.edu>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
