From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Cagney To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: Kimball Thurston , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: gdb and dlopen Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 08:54:00 -0000 Message-id: <3BCDA981.1080106@cygnus.com> References: <20011016161525.A1241@nevyn.them.org> <20011016213252.A8694@nevyn.them.org> <20011016220353.A9538@nevyn.them.org> <3BCCF83F.8010401@cygnus.com> <20011017010849.A23345@nevyn.them.org> <20011017011923.A27536@nevyn.them.org> X-SW-Source: 2001-10/msg00176.html > Amusingly, there are something like eight million calls to > ptid_get_pid. I'll send along a trivial patch to shrink the worst > offenders. I understand the opacity that functions over macros is > going for here, but a function that does 'return a.b;' and gets called > eight MILLION times is a little bit absurd, don't you think? Absurd > enough that it shows up as the second highest item on the profile. To speak vague fussy and hypothetical. This will go away. GDB has long had ``struct thread_info'' as a thread object. The underlying problem is that nothing makes use of this. Since a thread object could hold thread specific register and memory caches the minor overhead of a few functions would greatly outweigh the benefits of not going anywhere near ptrace when the user switches or manipulates threads. Andrew