From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13604 invoked by alias); 19 Apr 2006 07:30:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 13593 invoked by uid 22791); 19 Apr 2006 07:30:11 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nitzan.inter.net.il (HELO nitzan.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.20) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:30:07 +0000 Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-80-230-206-41.inter.net.il [80.230.206.41]) by nitzan.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3-GA) with ESMTP id DDW59000 (AUTH halo1); Wed, 19 Apr 2006 10:30:00 +0300 (IDT) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:28:00 -0000 Message-Id: From: Eli Zaretskii To: Vladimir Prus CC: gdb@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: (message from Vladimir Prus on Tue, 18 Apr 2006 20:10:34 +0400) Subject: Re: MI: performance of getting stack arguments Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-04/txt/msg00259.txt.bz2 > From: Vladimir Prus > Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 20:10:34 +0400 > > I've run into a performance problem with "-stack-list-arguments 1" command. > I issue the command in order to obtain stack arguments for all frames, and > I've 129 frames. Each frame has just a couple of arguments. However, the > command execution takes 608 ms. That's an awful lot, I think. When I debug Emacs, there are sometimes many _thousands_ of frames on the call stack (during GC, for example). > If this command is issued repeatedly, the time is roughly the same. > > 1. Any ideas why the command takes so long? GDB has a facility to profile itself (see "maint set profile"). Perhaps you could use that to find out where is the time sink.