|
From: Josef W. <Jos...@gm...> - 2002-12-02 22:10:48
|
Hi, recently I checked cachegrind in CVS HEAD. It gives out its information on BB level. E.g. for function foobar(), it gives cost values for foobar, foobar+20, foobar+50. I don't think this is intended, because the results look strange together with the usage of source line granularity. And it skrews up efficiency in the used hashes (35 BBs per source file ??). Its because get_debug_info does a call to the V core which gives back function names with offset. Should I come up with a patch for this? Josef |
|
From: Julian S. <js...@ac...> - 2002-12-15 13:25:39
|
Hi Josef
> recently I checked cachegrind in CVS HEAD.
> It gives out its information on BB level.
> E.g. for function foobar(), it gives cost values for
> foobar, foobar+20, foobar+50.
>
> I don't think this is intended, because the results look strange together
> with the usage of source line granularity. And it skrews up efficiency in
> the used hashes (35 BBs per source file ??).
I just checked a fix for this into CVS. The old behaviour should have
returned now. Maybe you can test it if you have a spare minute?
What is the status re making kcachegrind work well with the cvs head,
and therefore the soon-to-arrive 2.0 release?
See the attached message -- it looks like it would be cool if kcg worked
with the cvs head. CVS head contains bug fixes which fix Jody's
problem, and I really don't want to make any further releases of the 1.0.X
series since the head is now so vastly superior to it. Ideally we could
coordinate a little so that when v-2.0 finally ships (end Jan) there
is already good kcachegrind support for it.
Finally ... I think there is an outstanding issue re loading weak symbols
(didn't you mail me about that?) But I see in the cvs head this ...
snaffle_it
= ( (ELF32_ST_BIND(o_symtab[i].st_info) == STB_GLOBAL ||
ELF32_ST_BIND(o_symtab[i].st_info) == STB_LOCAL ||
ELF32_ST_BIND(o_symtab[i].st_info) == STB_WEAK)
&&
(ELF32_ST_TYPE(o_symtab[i].st_info) == STT_FUNC ||
(VG_(needs).data_syms
&& ELF32_ST_TYPE(o_symtab[i].st_info) == STT_OBJECT))
);
(vg_symtab2.c:1650) so that problem only exists in 1.0.X ? Can you
clarify (I'm unsure here).
Thanks,
J
---------------------------------------------------------------------
cachegrind vs GNOME
Date: Wed Dec 11 04:16:09 2002
From: Jody Goldberg <jo...@gn...>
To: js...@ac..., nj...@ca...
valgrind-1.0.x works nicely with GNOME2 applications provided one adds
--alignment=8
Many thanks for your excellent work. It's reduced my dependence on
people with access to purify. Sadly cachegrind-1.0 does not appear
to accept the alignment flag. I tried hand tweaking things to hard
code the parm to 8 to no avail. The 1.1.0 release appears to work
nicely, but does not seem compatible with kcachegrind or its
callgraph patch.
Any suggestions ?
Jody
|