From: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Cc: Tom de Vries <tdevries@suse.de>
Subject: [PATCH] Speedup lnp_state_machine::handle_special_opcode
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 13:03:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <nycvar.YFH.7.76.2002131358240.18835@zhemvz.fhfr.qr> (raw)
I see for some program at gdb startup
Samples: 102K of event 'cycles:pu', Event count (approx.): 91710925103
Overhead Command Shared Object Symbol
15.21% gdb gdb [.]
lnp_state_machine::handle_special
where the divisions are the places we stall. The following
micro-optimizes things but it smells like m_line_header->line_range
is constant, likewise probably m_line_header->maximum_ops_per_instruction
so eventually the divisions could be avoided completely with some
lookup table.
Well. Micro-optimizing with the patch below improves things
(don't expect [load] CSE over the gdbarch_adjust_dwarf2_line call).
Care to pick up this one-time patch without myself becoming familiar
with gdb testing & patch submission?
Thanks,
Richard.
diff --git a/gdb/dwarf2/read.c b/gdb/dwarf2/read.c
index 7edbd9d7df..e74383e01d 100644
--- a/gdb/dwarf2/read.c
+++ b/gdb/dwarf2/read.c
@@ -19812,16 +19812,16 @@ void
lnp_state_machine::handle_special_opcode (unsigned char op_code)
{
unsigned char adj_opcode = op_code - m_line_header->opcode_base;
- CORE_ADDR addr_adj = (((m_op_index
- + (adj_opcode / m_line_header->line_range))
+ unsigned char adj_opcode_d = adj_opcode / m_line_header->line_range;
+ unsigned char adj_opcode_r = adj_opcode % m_line_header->line_range;
+ CORE_ADDR addr_adj = (((m_op_index + adj_opcode_d)
/ m_line_header->maximum_ops_per_instruction)
* m_line_header->minimum_instruction_length);
m_address += gdbarch_adjust_dwarf2_line (m_gdbarch, addr_adj, true);
- m_op_index = ((m_op_index + (adj_opcode / m_line_header->line_range))
+ m_op_index = ((m_op_index + adj_opcode_d)
% m_line_header->maximum_ops_per_instruction);
- int line_delta = (m_line_header->line_base
- + (adj_opcode % m_line_header->line_range));
+ int line_delta = m_line_header->line_base + adj_opcode_r;
advance_line (line_delta);
record_line (false);
m_discriminator = 0;
next reply other threads:[~2020-02-13 13:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-13 13:03 Richard Biener [this message]
2020-02-13 14:23 ` Tom de Vries
2020-02-13 18:26 ` Pedro Alves
2020-02-14 7:39 ` Tom de Vries
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=nycvar.YFH.7.76.2002131358240.18835@zhemvz.fhfr.qr \
--to=rguenther@suse.de \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=tdevries@suse.de \
/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