Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
To: Nick Roberts <nickrob@snap.net.nz>
Cc: Vladimir Prus <ghost@cs.msu.su>, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MI: Free values when updating
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 12:12:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070123121147.GA32010@nevyn.them.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <17845.60212.898642.763807@kahikatea.snap.net.nz>

On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 12:02:12AM +1300, Nick Roberts wrote:
>  > > it's just that this patch stops calling it at other times 
>  > > when it's needed.  Without any change, do enable timings (if you have that
>  > > patch), create a variable object of a large array and all its children then
>  > > repeatedly do "-var-update *".  It should take longer and longer to execute.
>  > 
>  > Why? Is it because the memory consumption of gdb grows, or because the list
>  > of released values grows without ever being cleared, or for some other
>  > reason?
> 
> The latter, I think.

Except that there isn't a list of released values.  So what is GDB
doing that is taking longer and longer?

The call to release_value does a linear walk over all non-released
values.  So if we have a lot of things which aren't being released,
then your patch which calls free_all_values is probably the right thing
to do - that should clean it up.

>  > -      if (gdb_evaluate_expression (var->root->exp, &new_val))
>  > -	{
>  > -	  release_value (new_val);
>  > -	}
>  > -
>  > +      gdb_evaluate_expression (var->root->exp, &new_val);
>  >        return new_val;
>  >      }
> 
> I think if you also remove the (3) calls to release_value in c_value_of_child
> and cplus_value_of_child this is equivalent to my change (and more tidy).

No, those are different.  They come from things like the call to
gdb_value_ind in c_describe_child.  That creates a new value, which is
returned to the caller (the MI front end, to be printed and later
released).  It's the ones in c_value_of_root which matter, because we
save them in the varobj.

You're probably right about the increasing time though - releasing
something already released will be slow.  I wonder if we should make
that an internal error somehow.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery


  reply	other threads:[~2007-01-23 12:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-01-23  7:45 Nick Roberts
2007-01-23  7:55 ` Vladimir Prus
2007-01-23  8:56   ` Nick Roberts
2007-01-23  9:15     ` Vladimir Prus
2007-01-23 11:02       ` Nick Roberts
2007-01-23 12:12         ` Daniel Jacobowitz [this message]
2007-01-23 21:19           ` Nick Roberts
2007-01-23 21:35             ` Vladimir Prus
2007-01-24  8:00         ` Vladimir Prus
2007-01-24  9:14           ` Nick Roberts
2007-01-24  9:21             ` Vladimir Prus

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20070123121147.GA32010@nevyn.them.org \
    --to=drow@false.org \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
    --cc=ghost@cs.msu.su \
    --cc=nickrob@snap.net.nz \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox