From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25991 invoked by alias); 16 Apr 2003 13:37:50 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 25983 invoked from network); 16 Apr 2003 13:37:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (65.125.64.184) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 16 Apr 2003 13:37:49 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org ([66.93.61.169] ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 195n6r-00089j-00; Wed, 16 Apr 2003 08:37:57 -0500 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 195n6f-0001qp-00; Wed, 16 Apr 2003 09:37:45 -0400 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 13:37:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Andrew Cagney Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [wip] Delete prev_func_name and ecs->stop_func_name Message-ID: <20030416133745.GA6991@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Cagney , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <3E9CDC25.9060100@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3E9CDC25.9060100@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-04/txt/msg00318.txt.bz2 On Wed, Apr 16, 2003 at 12:29:25AM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: > Running the i386 testsuite with gcov on an existing GDB reveals: > > int > find_pc_sect_partial_function > 10133 { > 10133 struct partial_symtab *pst; > struct symbol *f; > struct minimal_symbol *msymbol; > struct partial_symbol *psb; > struct obj_section *osect; > int i; > CORE_ADDR mapped_pc; > > 10133 mapped_pc = overlay_mapped_address (pc, section); > > 10133 if (mapped_pc >= cache_pc_function_low > && mapped_pc < cache_pc_function_high > && section == cache_pc_function_section) > 3565 goto return_cached_value; > > 3565 if (SIGTRAMP_START_P () && ... > > that is, 10133 calls to find_pc_sect_partial_function, 3565 of which > missed in the cache. Modifying infrun.c so that it doesn't cache the > name turns up: > > int > find_pc_sect_partial_function > 12087 { > 12087 struct partial_symtab *pst; > struct symbol *f; > struct minimal_symbol *msymbol; > struct partial_symbol *psb; > struct obj_section *osect; > int i; > CORE_ADDR mapped_pc; > > 12087 mapped_pc = overlay_mapped_address (pc, section); > > 12087 if (mapped_pc >= cache_pc_function_low > && mapped_pc < cache_pc_function_high > && section == cache_pc_function_section) > 3569 goto return_cached_value; What're the following lines for both of these? There's some optimization at work here, or these numbers show the exact opposite of what you want. That's 3569 _hits_ to the cache. But matching the execution count for the line after the goto is suspicious. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer