This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: MI: performance of getting stack arguments

Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 10:20:07AM +0400, Vladimir Prus wrote:
>> It's specifically the -stack-list-arguments command that takes 600ms. The
>> separately issued -stack-list-frames takes 150ms which is not fast
>> either, but not as bad as -stack-list-arguments.
> OK, there is probably something absurdly stupid going on then.
>> > If it's the arguments,
>> > we may be able to improve it.  Maybe build a debuggable GDB and "maint
>> > set profile"?
>> Sure. What's the right way to build debuggable GDB, setting CFLAGS=-g
>> during configure or something else?
> Two ways.  You can use --enable-profiling as Eli suggested, which will
> let you get callgraphs, or you can just use a binary built with the
> default CFLAGS (-O2 -g), and "maint set profile".  You have to use
> gprof --no-graph on the output file to get output if you do that.  I
> still find it useful - e.g. the numbers I posted to dmi-discuss
> yesterday came from that.  Its advantage is that it doesn't inflate
> small functions as badly.

Ok, I'll try to do this. First on -stack-list-arguments, since it's pretty
slow to. But, maybe I should be using callgrind (part of valgrind suite)
for profiling?

- Volodya

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]