From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id WS1NMR73rWNktwsAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 29 Dec 2022 15:22:54 -0500 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id BD2B01E222; Thu, 29 Dec 2022 15:22:54 -0500 (EST) Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=VoAZpr+o; dkim-atps=neutral X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RDNS_DYNAMIC,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from sourceware.org (ip-8-43-85-97.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CCF0F1E0D3 for ; Thu, 29 Dec 2022 15:22:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18E793858417 for ; Thu, 29 Dec 2022 20:22:53 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 18E793858417 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1672345373; bh=HKMmH8U02FdGEWLYbMx3ahy8Jv7vjKxJXCnVex5l3WM=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From:Reply-To:From; b=VoAZpr+oaUQm0g1RiiP18NMUgvfH9YFjtHJGkDd83e3ff0wc0t3xS7DslgKw5Gp8F 7DlHgzT+bHigOorldJhFKfSKINWJk+cFF/zomvQjrTtcqlQJy0kBvPqEEUD0EAsmqZ Y/F9DHorjwjRMvOwQTRgJUrwz0tcMTeWQeEit0Xc= Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F1D2C3858CDA for ; Thu, 29 Dec 2022 20:22:32 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org F1D2C3858CDA Received: from [10.0.0.11] (unknown [217.28.27.60]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E9A451E0D3; Thu, 29 Dec 2022 15:22:31 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <587b899f-0f93-530a-7313-d4e1f9e501b9@simark.ca> Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2022 15:22:31 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.5.1 Subject: Re: Two observations using GDB 13 snapshot Content-Language: en-US To: Eli Zaretskii , Tom Tromey Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, luis.machado@arm.com References: <83h6xugc5v.fsf@gnu.org> <58b64bf8-90b6-d080-c060-d03761501199@arm.com> <83k02neezy.fsf@gnu.org> <835ye7e9jw.fsf@gnu.org> <87h6xrks77.fsf@tromey.com> <83mt7idacj.fsf@gnu.org> <87fsd4elb2.fsf@tromey.com> <83o7rs4qmg.fsf@gnu.org> <87cz84dasj.fsf@tromey.com> <835ydw20bw.fsf@gnu.org> <87wn6bbi5m.fsf@tromey.com> <83sfgz8m9i.fsf@gnu.org> <87o7rnb0ya.fsf@tromey.com> <83a6368chf.fsf@gnu.org> <87k02aaxc8.fsf@tromey.com> <83wn6a6n21.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <83wn6a6n21.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Simon Marchi Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" On 12/29/22 14:13, Eli Zaretskii via Gdb-patches wrote: >> From: Tom Tromey >> Cc: Tom Tromey , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, >> luis.machado@arm.com >> Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2022 11:17:27 -0700 >> >> I wonder if just randomly interrupting gdb a few times during that 2 >> minutes and doing a "bt" would be more informative. > > Done, see the attached. > It looks like we spend a lot of time sorting the vector of index entries. We spend a lot of time in tolower. Googling a bit, it looks like tolower can be slow on Windows when a locale (other than "C") is used: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/36686381/windows-c-runtime-toupper-slow-when-locale-set https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=45265 Simon