Mirror of the gdb mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Carlton <carlton@math.stanford.edu>
To: "Martin M. Hunt" <hunt@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com, Elena Zannoni <ezannoni@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: very very slow symbol searches
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 18:44:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ro1d6mpvxce.fsf@jackfruit.Stanford.EDU> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ro1hec1vy67.fsf@jackfruit.Stanford.EDU>

On 22 Jan 2003 10:26:08 -0800, David Carlton <carlton@math.Stanford.EDU> said:
> On 22 Jan 2003 04:00:16 -0800, "Martin M. Hunt" <hunt@redhat.com> said:

>> Insight calls search_symbols twice on startup.  Sometime 2-4 weeks
>> ago, (builds from CVS on sources) Insight started taking a minute
>> or two to load when debugging itself.  It is very fast when
>> debugging small programs, but large things like insight or gdb take
>> forever.  At first glance the problem is that search_symbols() is
>> taking 20-30 seconds to return.

> Could you give some commands to reproduce this problem?  (Preferably
> using GDB to debug itself.)  I tried running GDB on itself and then
> typing 'info functions', and I don't see any significant time
> difference on current mainline GDB versus GDB 5.2 or 5.3.  (In both
> cases, the version of GDB being debugged current mainline GDB.)  I
> also tried running to main first, to pull in dynamic libraries
> (which shouldn't have debug info on my system, I think).  Without
> running to main, mainline GDB was actually the fastest, albeit only
> slightly so; with running to main, mainline GDB was slightly slower
> than 5.3 but dramatically faster than 5.2.

Of course, my patch would have affected 'info variables' more than
'info functions'.  So I did the same tests with 'info variables';
here, 5.2 is really slow, 5.3 and mainline are better, and actually
mainline is faster than 5.3 on the version where I run to main first.

At any rate, obviously I'm not managing to tickle this bug correctly.
It is nice to see the speedup since 5.2: somebody obviously did
something good there.  (Is it an effect of hashing symtabs, maybe, or
did 5.2 already do that?)

David Carlton
carlton@math.stanford.edu


  reply	other threads:[~2003-01-22 18:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-01-22 11:58 Martin M. Hunt
2003-01-22 15:02 ` Elena Zannoni
2003-01-22 17:41   ` David Carlton
2003-01-22 19:36     ` Andrew Cagney
2003-01-22 20:46   ` Martin M. Hunt
2003-01-23  1:14     ` Martin M. Hunt
2003-01-23  1:45       ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-01-23  2:43         ` Martin M. Hunt
2003-01-23  6:10           ` Eli Zaretskii
2003-01-23 16:54           ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-01-23 20:06           ` Andrew Cagney
2003-01-22 18:26 ` David Carlton
2003-01-22 18:44   ` David Carlton [this message]
2003-01-26  7:48   ` Martin M. Hunt
2003-01-27 17:03 ` Andrew Cagney

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=ro1d6mpvxce.fsf@jackfruit.Stanford.EDU \
    --to=carlton@math.stanford.edu \
    --cc=ezannoni@redhat.com \
    --cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
    --cc=hunt@redhat.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