From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 84949 invoked by alias); 17 Aug 2015 18:54:50 -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 84940 invoked by uid 89); 17 Aug 2015 18:54:50 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: relay1.mentorg.com Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 17 Aug 2015 18:54:48 +0000 Received: from svr-orw-fem-02x.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.96.206] helo=SVR-ORW-FEM-02.mgc.mentorg.com) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1ZRPhB-0003kF-Ju from Sandra_Loosemore@mentor.com ; Mon, 17 Aug 2015 12:03:45 -0700 Received: from [IPv6:::1] (147.34.91.1) by svr-orw-fem-02.mgc.mentorg.com (147.34.96.168) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.224.2; Mon, 17 Aug 2015 11:54:45 -0700 Message-ID: <55D22D78.7030202@codesourcery.com> Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 18:54:00 -0000 From: Sandra Loosemore User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130329 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pedro Alves CC: Gary Benson , , Doug Evans Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make remote transfers interruptible References: <55C3A10F.3010106@codesourcery.com> <1439389814-29211-1-git-send-email-gbenson@redhat.com> <55CB8300.3060004@codesourcery.com> <55D20502.4070500@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <55D20502.4070500@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2015-08/txt/msg00439.txt.bz2 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