Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sandra Loosemore <sandra@codesourcery.com>
To: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
Cc: Gary Benson <gbenson@redhat.com>, <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>,
	Doug Evans	<dje@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make remote transfers interruptible
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 18:54:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <55D22D78.7030202@codesourcery.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55D20502.4070500@redhat.com>

On 08/17/2015 10:00 AM, Pedro Alves wrote:
>
> I was previously assuming you were seeing this on multiple machines,
> but looking back, I only find mention of nios2.
>
> Could it be the slowdown you see is caused by some other local patches
> you might have in the tree you're using?  Do you see it with pristine FSF?

I initially saw this in a local branch, but I have been very careful to 
reproduce and test things with an unmodified FSF checkout.

> If you try your example test with gdb 7.9, with "set sysroot remote:",
> does it also take the 4 minutes to reach main?
>
> Also, can you reproduce this with other machines?  E.g., what about
> x86_64 GNU/Linux?  Wondering whether it's a kernel/libc/etc issue...

The other Linux-target build I have handy for testing right now is 
arm-none-linux-gnueabi with unmodified FSF head, testing on a 
PandaBoard.  There I found it takes about 8 seconds to start up the same 
hello-world program that takes 4 minutes on Nios II with the new sysroot 
default, and < 1 second if I do "set sysroot" first.  Aside from 
possible kernel issues or whatever, the Nios II board is theoretically a 
factor of 20 slower than the PandaBoard (processor supposedly clocked at 
10Mhz, and only one core versus 1Ghz and 2 cores for the PandaBoard), 
and the libc.so it's transferring is larger.

-Sandra


  reply	other threads:[~2015-08-17 18:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-08-05 15:28 [PATCH 0/2] Better handling of slow remote transfers Gary Benson
2015-08-05 15:28 ` [PATCH 1/2] Warn when accessing binaries over RSP Gary Benson
2015-08-11 11:55   ` Andrew Burgess
2015-08-11 14:04     ` Gary Benson
2015-08-13 13:24       ` [PATCH v2] Warn when accessing binaries from remote targets Gary Benson
2015-08-13 15:07         ` Andrew Burgess
2015-08-21 15:41         ` Pedro Alves
2015-08-21 16:23           ` [pushed] " Gary Benson
2015-08-05 15:28 ` [PATCH 2/2] Make remote file transfers interruptible Gary Benson
2015-08-06 18:03   ` Sandra Loosemore
2015-08-11 10:52     ` Gary Benson
2015-08-12 14:30     ` [PATCH] Make remote " Gary Benson
2015-08-12 17:33       ` Sandra Loosemore
2015-08-12 17:40         ` Doug Evans
2015-08-13  9:10         ` Gary Benson
2015-08-14 18:37           ` Joel Brobecker
2015-08-17 16:00         ` Pedro Alves
2015-08-17 18:54           ` Sandra Loosemore [this message]
2015-08-21 15:16   ` [PATCH 2/2] Make remote file " Pedro Alves
2015-08-21 16:23     ` [pushed] " Gary Benson

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=55D22D78.7030202@codesourcery.com \
    --to=sandra@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=dje@google.com \
    --cc=gbenson@redhat.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=palves@redhat.com \
    /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