[Python-Dev] Do we still need BaseAddress in .vcproj files? (original) (raw)

Atul Varma varmaa at gmail.com
Fri Apr 25 23:52:31 CEST 2008

A while back I was reading an MSDN article that did some concrete research on the performance benefits of rebasing DLLs to avoid fixups at runtime, and it actually concluded that on modern systems, the benefits are really negligible. I tried finding the article on the net just now, though, and I couldn't, so don't take my word for it. This 1995 MSDN article provides an explanation and some raw numbers for systems at that time, though:

http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms810432.aspx

On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 2:00 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <martin at v.loewis.de> wrote:

> This was partly out of curiosity, and partly because it was quicker > doing that than finding a new unique base address to use for a new > module I added to my local tree. Rebuilt everything and ran a full > regression test, and everything passed. What am I missing? Do we > have parts of Python that rely on finding modules at explicit base > addresses? Is BaseAddress a relic from the past? Christian or > Martin?

As Christian says: specifying the base address so that the addresses don't overlap avoids having Windows to perform relocations on startup. There is a Microsoft tool (editbin /rebase) to compute non-overlapping base addresses for a given set of DLLs. Regards, Martin

Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev at python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/varmaa%40gmail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20080425/32942e94/attachment.htm>

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list