|
From: Nicholas N. <nj...@cs...> - 2005-06-02 16:15:40
|
On Wed, 1 Jun 2005, Robert Walsh wrote: > I've updated my stack changing patch (and rearranged my web page a > little.) > > Still to do: > > * Document usage. > * Measure performance impact. > * Write tests for VALGRIND_STACK_DELETE and VALGRIND_STACK_CHANGE. > * It could probably be made a bit more efficient by using an > interval skip-list to store the registered stack data instead of > a simple linked-list. After I see the performance impact, I'll > decide about this. I like this. It's a good approach to a problem we've had for a long time. --max-stackframe is also good but this seems necessary for the harder cases. It's a pretty clean addition too, which is good. Re performance, I wouldn't think it would make much difference to programs that don't use stack switching, since it only affects code that doesn't get run terribly often. It would be good to confirm that with numbers, though. N |