|
Re: Why we need delayed allocation!: msg#00033file-systems.ext2.devel
On Thu, 2003-12-25 at 20:27, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > The problem is that when the linker is writing out the ELF executable, > it is doing so via apparently random seeks, probably because it is > writing out the various ELF sections in some order which is most > convenient for itself. In particular, it appears than it wrote out the > 9 4k blocks that comprise the filefrag executable in the following order: > > Blocks 0, 7, 1, 4, 5, 2, 3, 6, 8 well the other possibility is that the elf linker is smart and writes stuff out in the order ld.so is going to use it and thus actually is *avoiding* seeks by means of controlled fragmentation!
|
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| Previous by Date: | Re: Why we need delayed allocation!: 00033, Alex Tomas |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Why we need delayed allocation!: 00033, Arjan van de Ven |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Why we need delayed allocation!i: 00033, Alex Tomas |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Why we need delayed allocation!: 00033, Arjan van de Ven |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
| News | FAQ | advertise |