From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9890 invoked by alias); 10 Mar 2004 14:56:03 -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 9883 invoked from network); 10 Mar 2004 14:56:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 10 Mar 2004 14:56:02 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i2AEu107024903 for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2004 09:56:01 -0500 Received: from zenia.home.redhat.com (porkchop.devel.redhat.com [172.16.58.2]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i2AEtx825945; Wed, 10 Mar 2004 09:56:00 -0500 To: Daniel Jacobowitz CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA/dwarf] Optimize partial DIE reading for uninteresting DIEs References: <20040225030644.GA5167@nevyn.them.org> <20040226231255.GC8487@nevyn.them.org> <20040227030310.GA24230@nevyn.them.org> <20040309195806.GA18334@nevyn.them.org> From: Jim Blandy Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 14:56:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20040309195806.GA18334@nevyn.them.org> Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2004-03.o/txt/msg00228.txt Message-ID: <20040310145600.GNLPaM9hlzGMXGTFubVFKgJYwVRor7HO4s2wKYphCq8@z> Daniel Jacobowitz writes: > On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 10:03:10PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 09:58:32PM -0500, Jim Blandy wrote: > > > It would be interesting to compare profiling results between two GDB's > > > that differ only in whether they use your attribute skipper or the > > > attribute value reader. > > > > For this patch, the changes were pretty small. For the larger change, > > with just partial symbol table reading, read_unsigned_leb128 dropped > > way down and skip_leb128 didn't climb equally far up. > > > > Let me reproduce those results, though. Something seems suspicious. > > Nah, seems good, although the difference is just a few percent at most; > I trust from my earlier measurements that it will make more of a > difference down the road. I've checked this in to HEAD. Okay, sounds good.