Re: [GOLD] add new method for computing a build ID

[David Miller <davem at davemloft dot net>]

From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 15:43:06 -0400

> On Wednesday 03 October 2012 15:25:44 David Miller wrote:
>> From: gpike@chromium.org
>> Date: Wed,  3 Oct 2012 12:20:17 -0700 (PDT)
>> 
>> > Motivation for the change: computing a build ID is currently a
>> > sequential bottleneck. E.g., in the example I mentioned in my email
>> > yesterday, a 24.5s link was spending 5.2s on the build ID computation.
>> 
>> Have you tried linking with OpenSSL and using their optimized MD5 and
>> SHA1 variants?  I bet it makes a huge difference, some cpus even have
>> SHA1 and MD5 instructions.
> 
> last i heard, openssl's license is incompatible with the GPL

I'm just saying, if the SHA1 and MD5 code we have in libiberty or
wherever unnecessarily slow that guides the solution.  I'm not saying
we have to use OpenSSL's code for the fix.

You don't even know if that's what the issue is.

It's a real scarecrow to bring up licensing issues when I'm merely
trying to point out that we should first determine if we simply have
an unreasonable slow set of crypto hashing functions.