This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
[0/7] RFC: read DWARF psymtabs in the background
- From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- To: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 12:21:58 -0600
- Subject: [0/7] RFC: read DWARF psymtabs in the background
- Reply-to: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
This is a patch series to implement reading psymtabs for DWARF in the
background.
The motivation for this is a better user experience. With this series,
gdb starts up dramatically faster, because we can hide much of the
reading in the background:
gdb -batch -nx ./gdb
Without: 2.37user 0.45system 0:03.47elapsed
With: 0.23user 0.04system 0:00.34elapsed
This example measures time-to-the-prompt. Once at the prompt, if you do
some operation needing psymtabs, gdb will wait until they have been read
in.
It also works when attaching to a program with a lot of objfiles. Here
is startup for attach to OO.o Writer:
gdb -batch -p NNNN
Without: 40.44user 2.19system 1:36.94elapsed
With: 2.20user 0.24system 0:04.32elapsed
It is not dramatically better in all cases:
gdb -batch -ex "thread apply all bt full" -p NNN
Without: 44.31user 2.31system 1:39.16elapsed
With: 46.01user 2.88system 1:21.92elapsed
In this case we end up waiting for most of the debuginfo to be read.
I have some other changes, coming later, that help with this.
All the code is written so that threads are optional. On platforms
without threads, everything works as before, albeit in a somewhat more
convoluted way.
There are still some unpolished edges in this series. I will try to
call these out in the specific patches.
As you might imagine it is rather tough to be certain that this code is
truly thread-safe. GDB has plenty of hidden global variables, shared
state, etc. I'll explain my approach to making this as safe as I could
in the appropriate patches.
Note that the patches probably don't build independently. I didn't
really try that; I just split them up along conceptual lines.
I realize that threads are unpopular in many quarters, so this is an RFC.
I think I regtested this, but it is hard to recall. Anyway it doesn't
matter -- I will do that when I fix the little problems that remain.
Tom