Medve Emilian wrote:
> Would it be possible to do the sort "in place" (without the extra
> buffer)? I mean would that upset any other part of the kernel?
I suspect so. Sounds like you've got the good testcase, maybe you
should try it and see. :)
___
Li
8:34 PM
> To: Medve Emilian
> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
> Subject: [RFC/PATCH] reduce load time for modules with lots of relocs
>
> Nathan Lynch wrote:
> > Medve Emilian-EMMEDVE1 wrote:
> > >
> > > I have module with 36K relocation entries (I know, I
> know
On Mon, 5 Nov 2007 20:33:55 -0600 Nathan Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> static unsigned int count_relocs(const Elf32_Rela *rela, unsigned int num)
> {
> - unsigned int i, j, ret = 0;
> + unsigned int i, sorted_count = 0;
> + Elf32_Word last_info;
> + Elf32_Sword last_addend;
Nathan Lynch wrote:
> Medve Emilian-EMMEDVE1 wrote:
> >
> > I have module with 36K relocation entries (I know, I know, how could
> > that be...) and the count_relocs() function takes ~17 seconds to crunch
> > through the relocation table from the .rela.text section. I don't think
> > I can reduce
