From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10119 invoked by alias); 21 Feb 2014 18:23:42 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-help-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 10110 invoked by uid 89); 21 Feb 2014 18:23:41 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_20,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-vc0-f196.google.com Received: from mail-vc0-f196.google.com (HELO mail-vc0-f196.google.com) (209.85.220.196) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 18:23:39 +0000 Received: by mail-vc0-f196.google.com with SMTP id lf12so1177515vcb.7 for ; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 10:23:37 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.52.95.233 with SMTP id dn9mr4810428vdb.3.1393007017101; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 10:23:37 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.58.84.200 with HTTP; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 10:23:37 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <5307922A.9020907@aol.com> References: <5307922A.9020907@aol.com> Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 18:23:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: gprof output question From: MR ZenWiz To: gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-02/txt/msg00141.txt.bz2 On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Tim Prince wrote: > > On 2/20/2014 6:42 PM, MR ZenWiz wrote: >> >> In using gprof on a large C++ app, there are a number of functions in >> the output that do not have any class name or parameters associated >> with them. >> >> In a thorough search of the app source, I cannot find any functions >> defined with a particular name that shows up like this in the gprof >> output. >> >> How can I track down where these functions live? >> >> In the call trace section, they show up as "spontaneous," so I can't >> even tell from where they are called. >> >> Any guidance would be most appreciated. >> >> Thanks. >> >> MR > > A function called from a source file not built with -pg or via a function > pointer (so that the actual function isn't known at compile time) would > likely produce a . It's also helpful to use -static linking. > The external libraries involved here are all statically linked. That does help, though. I've created a test version that uses a different library and we'll see what happens. Hopefully it will confirm my diagnosis and we can move forward. Thanks. MR