←back to thread

Wild – A fast linker for Linux

(github.com)
383 points hkalbasi | 3 comments | 24 Jan 25 16:25 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
pzmarzly ◴[24 Jan 25 16:55 UTC] No.42815005[source]▶
Ever since mold relicensed from AGPL to MIT (as part of mold 2.0 release), the worldwide need for making another fast linker has been greatly reduced, so I wasn't expecting a project like this to appear. And definitely wasn't expecting it to already be 2x faster than mold in some cases. Will keep an eye on this project to see how it evolves, best of luck to the author.
replies(5): >>42815102 #>>42815606 #>>42816517 #>>42819089 #>>42819826 #
secondcoming ◴[24 Jan 25 17:03 UTC] No.42815102[source]▶
Maybe I'm holding it wrong, but mold isn't faster at all if you're using LTO, which you probably should be.
replies(6): >>42815189 #>>42815221 #>>42815904 #>>42816102 #>>42816403 #>>42840365 #
1. compiler-guy ◴[24 Jan 25 18:41 UTC] No.42815904[source]▶
Mold will be faster than LLD even using LTO, but all of its benefits will be absolutely swamped by the LTO process, which is, more or less, recompiling the entire program from high-level LLVM-IR. That's extremely expensive and dwarfs any linking advantages.

So the benefit will be barely noticable. As another comment points out, LTO should only be used when you need a binary optimized to within an inch of its life, such as a release copy, or a copy for performance testing.

replies(1): >>42817272 #
2. paulddraper ◴[24 Jan 25 21:52 UTC] No.42817272[source]▶
Username checks out.

And factual.

replies(1): >>42819468 #
3. saagarjha ◴[25 Jan 25 04:21 UTC] No.42819468[source]▶
I'm waiting for 'linker-guy to weigh in, personally.