Comments on: analyzing linker max vsize http://blog.mozilla.org/nfroyd/2013/01/22/analyzing-linker-max-vsize/ Improving performance at Mozilla Sat, 20 Apr 2013 10:00:40 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1 By: Nathan Froyd http://blog.mozilla.org/nfroyd/2013/01/22/analyzing-linker-max-vsize/#comment-801 Nathan Froyd Tue, 22 Jan 2013 21:15:22 +0000 http://blog.mozilla.org/nfroyd/?p=120#comment-801 Is the non-presence of a webrtc merge in pushlog merely an instance of pushlog brokenness, then? I see the strip commits, which I remember from the webrtc landing, but I don’t see anything associated with the landing itself.

]]> By: Randell Jesup http://blog.mozilla.org/nfroyd/2013/01/22/analyzing-linker-max-vsize/#comment-800 Randell Jesup Tue, 22 Jan 2013 21:12:49 +0000 http://blog.mozilla.org/nfroyd/?p=120#comment-800 The early October jump was the remainder of webrtc landing in m-c from alder (signaling in particular (>200Klines), also mtransport, datachannels I think and other pieces)

]]> By: Guilherme Lima http://blog.mozilla.org/nfroyd/2013/01/22/analyzing-linker-max-vsize/#comment-799 Guilherme Lima Tue, 22 Jan 2013 20:59:56 +0000 http://blog.mozilla.org/nfroyd/?p=120#comment-799 The topics on Mozillazine with theses days are:
http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=2564537 (10-05)
http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=2565929 (10-06)
http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=2566595 (10-07)
http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=2567657 (10-08)
Maybe the name of the bugs can help to find those that added a lot of code?

]]> By: Nathan Froyd http://blog.mozilla.org/nfroyd/2013/01/22/analyzing-linker-max-vsize/#comment-798 Nathan Froyd Tue, 22 Jan 2013 20:52:58 +0000 http://blog.mozilla.org/nfroyd/?p=120#comment-798 You could bisect it, sure. It’d take a couple of days to do so, though.

]]> By: Anders http://blog.mozilla.org/nfroyd/2013/01/22/analyzing-linker-max-vsize/#comment-797 Anders Tue, 22 Jan 2013 20:48:39 +0000 http://blog.mozilla.org/nfroyd/?p=120#comment-797 > There’s nothing in any of them that jumps out.
Wouldn’t this be something for a bisect?

]]> By: Nathan Froyd http://blog.mozilla.org/nfroyd/2013/01/22/analyzing-linker-max-vsize/#comment-796 Nathan Froyd Tue, 22 Jan 2013 19:46:11 +0000 http://blog.mozilla.org/nfroyd/?p=120#comment-796 It’s faster to have as much stuff as you can packed into a single library; inter-library calls are relatively more expensive than intra-library calls. I think there might also be some disk I/O wins from having all the code in a single file (don’t have to seek around the disk to get to multiple files at startup).

Your suggestion has been done in the past to get the linker’s required memory down to something manageable. We can now turn on aggressive optimizations on a per-directory basis in the source tree, and that’s somewhat easier than moving things out of libxul. There may come another point where we have to move code out of libxul again, though.

]]> By: ferongr http://blog.mozilla.org/nfroyd/2013/01/22/analyzing-linker-max-vsize/#comment-795 ferongr Tue, 22 Jan 2013 19:39:10 +0000 http://blog.mozilla.org/nfroyd/?p=120#comment-795 What’s the rationale for not splitting the catch-all XUL.dll into multiple libraries (since linking xul.dll is what causes the linker to run out of address space AIU)?

]]> By: Nathan Froyd http://blog.mozilla.org/nfroyd/2013/01/22/analyzing-linker-max-vsize/#comment-794 Nathan Froyd Tue, 22 Jan 2013 18:51:27 +0000 http://blog.mozilla.org/nfroyd/?p=120#comment-794 The drop in June corresponds to http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/pushloghtml?fromchange=95d1bb200f4e15f340abb59a883713a2edc55861&tochange=dc410944aabcab8ff2825d7e8d3f3391e3fe5876

Which is not very helpful, because nothing jumps out as shouting that “I made vsize go down by 200MB!”

]]> By: glandium http://blog.mozilla.org/nfroyd/2013/01/22/analyzing-linker-max-vsize/#comment-793 glandium Tue, 22 Jan 2013 18:34:24 +0000 http://blog.mozilla.org/nfroyd/?p=120#comment-793 I wouldn’t be surprised if http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/ae0b2ba1e47e participates greatly in the 2012-05-18 increase.

]]> By: glandium http://blog.mozilla.org/nfroyd/2013/01/22/analyzing-linker-max-vsize/#comment-792 glandium Tue, 22 Jan 2013 18:29:21 +0000 http://blog.mozilla.org/nfroyd/?p=120#comment-792 What’s interesting is the drop in June.

]]>