Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Aditya Kamath <Aditya.Kamath1@ibm.com>
To: Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@polymtl.ca>,
	Ulrich Weigand <Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com>,
	"akamath996@gmail.com" <akamath996@gmail.com>,
	"tom@tromey.com" <tom@tromey.com>
Cc: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>,
	SANGAMESH MALLAYYA <sangamesh.swamy@in.ibm.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] Speed up next/step while debugging multithreaded programs on AIX.
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2026 11:38:38 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <LV8PR15MB6488E34895C1C02D8DBFA756D6BA2@LV8PR15MB6488.namprd15.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2207a4ad-d2c5-43a2-9d91-4c6d80b1558b@polymtl.ca>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1309 bytes --]

Hi Simon, Ulrich and community members,

Please see comments below. Thank you very much for the feedback. Special thanks Simon for suggesting something I explored in GDB codebase.


>> This last part seems racy to me.  In principle, it is possible
>> that one thread terminated and simultaneously one new thread was
>> created, since the last time we stopped.  In this case, the thread
>> count would be the same, but the thread list still incorrect.
>>
>> Given the other test for single-stepping, is this particular
>> check even still resulting in a noticeable performance
>> difference?

Thanks Ulrich. In v3 version of the patch I have made sure we use only single step and no counts are used to save time. It is something I did not think of.

>I would suggest making a patch with just the get_signaled_thread batch
>change first, since that one looks fairly safe and low hanging fruit.
>Then, measure again and then look for the next optimization.
>I would suggest using the "scoped_time_it" class to measure the
>execution time of various functions and scopes.  This object measures

Thanks Simon,

In 2nd and 3rd patch of the coming series I have done the same. Sending the patch with this data in the commit message.

Have a nice day ahead.

Thanks and regards,
Aditya.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3399 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2026-09-16 11:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-09-10 10:16 Aditya Vidyadhar Kamath
2026-09-10 13:14 ` Ulrich Weigand
2026-09-10 13:45   ` Simon Marchi
2026-09-16 11:38     ` Aditya Kamath [this message]
2026-09-10 13:25 ` Simon Marchi
2026-09-16 11:40   ` Aditya Kamath
2026-09-10 17:32 ` Abhay Kandpal
2026-09-16 11:36   ` Aditya Kamath

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=LV8PR15MB6488E34895C1C02D8DBFA756D6BA2@LV8PR15MB6488.namprd15.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=aditya.kamath1@ibm.com \
    --cc=Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=akamath996@gmail.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=sangamesh.swamy@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=simon.marchi@polymtl.ca \
    --cc=tom@tromey.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