Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 8026675
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 4, 20262026-06-04T23:34:06+00:00 2026-06-04T23:34:06+00:00

I have performance critical code written for multiple CPUs. I detect CPU at run-time

  • 0

I have performance critical code written for multiple CPUs. I detect CPU at run-time and based on that I use appropriate function for the detected CPU. So, now I have to use function pointers and call functions using these function pointers:

void do_something_neon(void);
void do_something_armv6(void);

void (*do_something)(void);

if(cpu == NEON) {
    do_something = do_something_neon;
}else{
    do_something = do_something_armv6;
}

//Use function pointer:
do_something(); 
...

Not that it matters, but I’ll mention that I have optimized functions for different cpu’s: armv6 and armv7 with NEON support. The problem is that by using function pointers in many places the code become slower and I’d like to avoid that problem.

Basically, at load time linker resolves relocs and patches code with function addresses. Is there a way to control better that behavior?

Personally, I’d propose two different ways to avoid function pointers: create two separate .so (or .dll) for cpu dependent functions, place them in different folders and based on detected CPU add one of these folders to the search path (or LD_LIB_PATH). The, load main code and dynamic linker will pick up required dll from the search path. The other way is to compile two separate copies of library 🙂
The drawback of the first method is that it forces me to have at least 3 shared objects (dll’s): two for the cpu dependent functions and one for the main code that uses them. I need 3 because I have to be able to do CPU detection before loading code that uses these cpu dependent functions. The good part about the first method is that the app won’t need to load multiple copies of the same code for multiple CPUs, it will load only the copy that will be used. The drawback of the second method is quite obvious, no need to talk about it.

I’d like to know if there is a way to do that without using shared objects and manually loading them at runtime. One of the ways would be some hackery that involves patching code at run-time, it’s probably too complicated to get it done properly). Is there a better way to control relocations at load time? Maybe place cpu dependent functions in different sections and then somehow specify what section has priority? I think MAC’s macho format has something like that.

ELF-only (for arm target) solution is enough for me, I don’t really care for PE (dll’s).

thanks

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-06-04T23:34:08+00:00Added an answer on June 4, 2026 at 11:34 pm

    Here’s the exact answer that I was looking for.

     GCC's __attribute__((ifunc("resolver")))
    

    It requires fairly recent binutils.
    There’s a good article that describes this extension: Gnu support for CPU dispatching – sort of…

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I have a piece of performance critical code written with pointers and dynamic memory.
C#, .NET4. We have some performance critical code that is causing some problems. It
I'm writing Objective-C code with LLVM. I have one file full of very performance-critical
I have some performance-heavy code that performs bit manipulations. It can be reduced to
I have a performance critical piece of code for which I am considering using
I'm currently working on some performance critical code, and I have a particular situation
The problem: we have critical path code that should never block. In many places
I have a performance bottleneck on a DataView.Sort. The code is below. /// <summary>
I have a performance run scenario which calls cd %AUTORUN_DIR% call abc.bat cd %AUTORUN_DIR%
i have a performance issue in my tableview my cellForRow looks like that: if

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.