From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 34831 invoked by alias); 16 Mar 2017 19:21:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 34817 invoked by uid 89); 16 Mar 2017 19:21:37 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=H*f:sk:58CAD90, H*f:sk:46433bf, NFS, 0m3.504s X-HELO: mail-wm0-f46.google.com Received: from mail-wm0-f46.google.com (HELO mail-wm0-f46.google.com) (74.125.82.46) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 19:21:36 +0000 Received: by mail-wm0-f46.google.com with SMTP id t189so56298334wmt.1 for ; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 12:21:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=R1034wtJx2iiWb7tPxJtR3ifrcCuyeShyE9hFhQy8e8=; b=ZDWaF4v/oWNSn2AP2CCOQWqTsCKkQZcK3N37PsEFtbbfAs8e+LjaCzkyczdNVzqrDf x5Fbx1bUH2TcoYNHnrCcSaZjjf7DuNEiSVmbwnrmMl+tfNTPqPZS/plQwUycanTt97i1 8oCY1z8bshiivABODbvA7qcLkVXqnykdrL3sjzH0D/56kr7KZ5SLIeNmTTy7JIMv7JMA 1ZKcGS17gngy3yX7ml1a7R+iwQD9LjyExhY4EDoct9F0t6rR2kjYaeYdsPCNtu/eUgte r+oIH7l1kDF7UAM0u/ZldnciwntkBTanhrYdRVdvldY/mkXGrFqPZMxQAVGZAybi2EwJ zyBw== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H1w8/ZwzP3/imRHpaCbldgt9uXZTlh4S10K4TXkU7MhLI3AxKps3OYBTLP38p3EuRFV X-Received: by 10.28.139.134 with SMTP id n128mr24797842wmd.132.1489692094692; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 12:21:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.101] ([37.189.166.198]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b17sm5378002wma.33.2017.03.16.12.21.33 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 16 Mar 2017 12:21:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdb.base/siginfo-thread.exp: Increase timeout for 'gcore' command To: Wei-min Pan References: <1488338603-107524-1-git-send-email-weimin.pan@oracle.com> <868to5mgam.fsf@gmail.com> <58CAB698.7040602@oracle.com> <58CAD90A.40809@oracle.com> <46433bf1-c3a6-d2fc-c6b3-1cfe21553a87@redhat.com> <58CAE319.1030807@oracle.com> Cc: Yao Qi , gdb-patches@sourceware.org From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: <19e4cf44-5e49-09ef-4055-14b611fc64c2@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 19:21:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <58CAE319.1030807@oracle.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2017-03/txt/msg00293.txt.bz2 On 03/16/2017 07:10 PM, Wei-min Pan wrote: >> You mean that by hand it went faster than that? >> So what is GDB doing differently when run via make check >> that makes it slower than running by hand? >> > > Yes, but not by much faster: > > % cat in > run > gcore tmp.gcore > quit > > % time my_gdb siginfo-thread -x in > ... > real 0m13.327s > user 0m3.504s > sys 0m7.572s Either I'm missing something, or that was _slower_ than then number you shown of running via the testsuite, not faster... So WDT is GDB doing that takes that long? Is that writing the core to a slow NFS mount or something? Here that takes: real 0m0.120s user 0m0.090s sys 0m0.033s and this is not a state-of-the-art machine. Can you guess the next question? Pick any other core test in the testsuite, do the same and compare the numbers. And if they're different, the next question would then be, "what's different in this test, why's it slower?". If they're similar, then, well, the same question. :-) Thanks, Pedro Alves