Comment 24 for bug 1266492

On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 03:54:30PM +0000, bugdal at aerifal dot cx wrote:
> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16159
>
> --- Comment #18 from Rich Felker <bugdal at aerifal dot cx> ---
> Ondrej, did you even check your results with readelf or ldd? -lgcc is a static
> library and is always linked, so of course it won't make any difference. You
> need to test with -lgcc_s (and double-check to make sure the dependency really
> got added).
>
I asked for benchmark because of that, with a lgcc_s there is difference.

plain

real 0m3.039s
user 0m0.195s
sys 0m3.049s

with lgcc_s

real 0m3.141s
user 0m0.169s
sys 0m3.179s

with lpthread

real 0m3.282s
user 0m0.182s
sys 0m3.308s

> BTW, I'm not sure how well your test will do measuring exec time versus other
> overhead. If you'd like, I have a test I can post that execs itself and
> measures the actual time from just before the execve syscall to the start of
> main.
>
These also count as I wanted to show a relative performance impact. If
this is taken into extreme we could improve performance by staticaly linking lm and lpthread

Or using prelink.