rustc will use rust-lld by default on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu on nightly to significantly reduce linking times.rustc will use rust-lld by default on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu on nightly to significantly reduce linking times.

rust-lld: How It Can Give You Faster Linking Times

2025/10/05 22:45

TL;DR: rustc will use rust-lld by default on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu on nightly to significantly reduce linking times.

Some context

Linking time is often a big part of compilation time. When rustc needs to build a binary or a shared library, it will usually call the default linker installed on the system to do that (this can be changed on the command-line or by the target for which the code is compiled).

\ The linkers do an important job, with concerns about stability, backwards-compatibility and so on. For these and other reasons, on the most popular operating systems they usually are older programs, designed when computers only had a single core. So, they usually tend to be slow on a modern machine. For example, when building ripgrep 13 in debug mode on Linux, roughly half of the time is actually spent in the linker.

\ There are different linkers, however, and the usual advice to improve linking times is to use one of these newer and faster linkers, like LLVM's lld or Rui Ueyama's mold.

\ Some of Rust's wasm and aarch64 targets already use lld by default. When using rustup, rustc ships with a version of lld for this purpose. When CI builds LLVM to use in the compiler, it also builds the linker and packages it. It's referred to as rust-lld to avoid colliding with any lld already installed on the user's machine.

\ Since improvements to linking times are substantial, it would be a good default to use in the most popular targets. This has been discussed for a long time, for example in issues #39915 and #71515, and rustc already offers nightly flags to use rust-lld.

\ By now, we believe we've done all the internal testing that we could, on CI, crater, and our benchmarking infrastructure. We would now like to expand testing and gather real-world feedback and use-cases. Therefore, we will enable rust-lld to be the linker used by default on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu for nightly builds.

Benefits

While this also enables the compiler to use more linker features in the future, the most immediate benefit is much improved linking times.

\ Here are more details from the ripgrep example mentioned above: linking is reduced 7x, resulting in a 40% reduction in end-to-end compilation times.

Before/after comparison of a ripgrep debug build

Most binaries should see some improvements here, but it's especially significant with e.g. bigger binaries, or when involving debuginfo. These usually see bottlenecks in the linker.

\ Here's a link to the complete results from our benchmarks.

\ If testing goes well, we can then stabilize using this faster linker by default for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu users, before maybe looking at other targets.

Possible drawbacks

From our prior testing, we don't really expect issues to happen in practice. It is a drop-in replacement for the vast majority of cases, but lld is not bug-for-bug compatible with GNU ld.

\ In any case, using rust-lld can be disabled if any problem occurs: use the -Z linker-features=-lld flag to revert to using the system's default linker.

\ Some crates somehow relying on these differences could need additional link args. For example, we saw <20 crates in the crater run failing to link because of a different default about encapsulation symbols: these could require -Clink-arg=-Wl,-z,nostart-stop-gc to match the legacy GNU ld behavior.

\ Some of the big gains in performance come from parallelism, which could be undesirable in resource-constrained environments.

Summary

rustc will use rust-lld on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu nightlies, for much improved linking times, starting in tomorrow's rustup nightly (nightly-2024-05-18). Let us know if you encounter problems, by opening an issue on GitHub.

\ If that happens, you can revert to the default linker with the -Z linker-features=-lld flag. Either by adding it to the usual RUSTFLAGS environment variable, or to a project's .cargo/config.toml configuration file, like so:

[target.x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu] rustflags = ["-Zlinker-features=-lld"] 

Rémy Rakic on behalf of the compiler performance working group

\ Also published here

\ Photo by Antoine Gravier on Unsplash

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact [email protected] for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Whales Dump 200 Million XRP in Just 2 Weeks – Is XRP’s Price on the Verge of Collapse?

Whales Dump 200 Million XRP in Just 2 Weeks – Is XRP’s Price on the Verge of Collapse?

Whales offload 200 million XRP leaving market uncertainty behind. XRP faces potential collapse as whales drive major price shifts. Is XRP’s future in danger after massive sell-off by whales? XRP’s price has been under intense pressure recently as whales reportedly offloaded a staggering 200 million XRP over the past two weeks. This massive sell-off has raised alarms across the cryptocurrency community, as many wonder if the market is on the brink of collapse or just undergoing a temporary correction. According to crypto analyst Ali (@ali_charts), this surge in whale activity correlates directly with the price fluctuations seen in the past few weeks. XRP experienced a sharp spike in late July and early August, but the price quickly reversed as whales began to sell their holdings in large quantities. The increased volume during this period highlights the intensity of the sell-off, leaving many traders to question the future of XRP’s value. Whales have offloaded around 200 million $XRP in the last two weeks! pic.twitter.com/MiSQPpDwZM — Ali (@ali_charts) September 17, 2025 Also Read: Shiba Inu’s Price Is at a Tipping Point: Will It Break or Crash Soon? Can XRP Recover or Is a Bigger Decline Ahead? As the market absorbs the effects of the whale offload, technical indicators suggest that XRP may be facing a period of consolidation. The Relative Strength Index (RSI), currently sitting at 53.05, signals a neutral market stance, indicating that XRP could move in either direction. This leaves traders uncertain whether the XRP will break above its current resistance levels or continue to fall as more whales sell off their holdings. Source: Tradingview Additionally, the Bollinger Bands, suggest that XRP is nearing the upper limits of its range. This often points to a potential slowdown or pullback in price, further raising concerns about the future direction of the XRP. With the price currently around $3.02, many are questioning whether XRP can regain its footing or if it will continue to decline. The Aftermath of Whale Activity: Is XRP’s Future in Danger? Despite the large sell-off, XRP is not yet showing signs of total collapse. However, the market remains fragile, and the price is likely to remain volatile in the coming days. With whales continuing to influence price movements, many investors are watching closely to see if this trend will reverse or intensify. The coming weeks will be critical for determining whether XRP can stabilize or face further declines. The combination of whale offloading and technical indicators suggest that XRP’s price is at a crossroads. Traders and investors alike are waiting for clear signals to determine if the XRP will bounce back or continue its downward trajectory. Also Read: Metaplanet’s Bold Move: $15M U.S. Subsidiary to Supercharge Bitcoin Strategy The post Whales Dump 200 Million XRP in Just 2 Weeks – Is XRP’s Price on the Verge of Collapse? appeared first on 36Crypto.
Share
Coinstats2025/09/17 23:42