This is the mail archive of the gdb@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: gdb and dlopen


> 
> I'm absolutely sure.  Or at least, I was... when I tested this, it was
> an obvious win.  Now it is an obvious LOSS to turn on the cache.  I'm
> not sure why, so I'll have to investigate it later.  In 5.0.90-cvs it
> was a win and in current trunk it is a significant performance loss.
> 
> This is in the context of a linuxthreads application.  We do a
> ridiculous, staggering amount of memory transfer in order to debug a
> linuxthreads application, and parts of it are duplicated.

Hmm, In the context of threads, trying to use the insn/data cache is 
cheating :-)

The problem with threads is that GDB is constantly discarding its per 
thread information.  Only to immediatly turn around and ask that that 
same information be re-created.  GDB, when switching between threads, 
should retain that information in the the ``struct thread_info''.  Even 
register information could be cached on a per-thread basis.

See 
http://sources.redhat.com/gdb/papers/multi-arch/real-multi-arch/index.html#SEC37

enjoy,
Andrew



Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]