[dpdk-dev] DPDK and Link-time Optimizations

Thomas Monjalon thomas at monjalon.net
Fri Nov 8 15:31:44 CET 2019


29/04/2019 18:39, Mattias Rönnblom:
> If LTO builds would work "out of the box", DPDK could gradually migrate 
> from away from having static inline functions in the header files.
> 
> Those interested squeezing out as much performance as possible would 
> build with LTO (and static linking), and those applications who cared 
> more about independent upgrades would use dynamic linking and non-LTO 
> builds. With the extra cost of using DPDK as a shared library 
> (-fPIC-compiled code, more expensive TLS accesses etc), I'm guessing 
> this is the case already today.

That's an interesting point of view.

For info, LTO is merged now.

I would like to see some benchmarks about
LTO static vs shared vs shared without inlines.
Then we could decide what to do with inline functions.





More information about the dev mailing list