From: Raphael Zulliger <zulliger@indel.ch>
To: "gdb@sourceware.org" <gdb@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: Performance issue of -var-list-children on structs with many members and remote targets
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 14:57:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53E8D9D0.9010508@indel.ch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53E4A6F8.1000905@codesourcery.com>
On 08/08/2014 12:31 PM, Yao Qi wrote:
> On 08/08/2014 03:25 PM, Raphael Zulliger wrote:
>> Now my simple question: Couldn't GDB be tweaked to get the struct member
>> values by just one call (because members within a struct are guaranteed
>> to be consecutive, aren't they?):
>>
>> 499,883 38-var-list-children var2.public
>> 499,884 &"Sending packet: $m601050,24#??"
>>
>> I guess this would dramatically increase overall performance.
>>
>> I would really like to see such an improvement in GDB. Therefore, I'd be
>> very happy to hear your thoughts and suggestion. Thinks like: What
>> problems (e.g. border cases) could arise when implementing this? Where
>> to start in the GDB code for such a modification? Or do there exist any
>> GDB switches to improve performance on such operations? etc...
> I have no idea how to merge multiple reads into one.
Thanks for your response!
I guess you are aware of the fact that -data-evaluate-expression is
already getting the data in the most efficient way, see e.g.:
-data-evaluate-expression --thread 1 --frame 0 g_s
&"Sending packet: $m601050,18#2e..."
&"Packet received: 000000000000f03f00000000000000000000000000000000\n"
^done,value="{a = 1, b = 0, c = 0}"
Couldn't we do the same during a '-var-update' for a struct like varobj
and let it propagate the values to it's children, instead of letting the
children update their values?
An implementation could probably indeed be done with a cache system, as
suggested by you below. Then the "only" changes would be to implement
that cache and to update struct-like varobj *before* traversing their
children. Would something like that make sense?
>
> Cache is used in GDB to read code and stack from target, which
> increases performance to some extent (See target_read_code and
> target_read_stack). However, cache is NOT used to read general data.
> Probably, you can make general data reading use cache too.
In our use case, we're debugging real-time systems in which (global)
data often changes at a rapid rate and thus the cache alone wouldn't
help much.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-08-11 14:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-08-08 7:25 Raphael Zulliger
2014-08-08 10:35 ` Yao Qi
2014-08-11 14:57 ` Raphael Zulliger [this message]
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=53E8D9D0.9010508@indel.ch \
--to=zulliger@indel.ch \
--cc=gdb@sourceware.org \
/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