From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19716 invoked by alias); 23 May 2003 11:59:16 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 19700 invoked from network); 23 May 2003 11:59:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 23 May 2003 11:59:15 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h4NBxFH26926; Fri, 23 May 2003 07:59:15 -0400 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.156]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h4NBxFI16210; Fri, 23 May 2003 07:59:15 -0400 Received: from [150.1.200.14] (vpn50-24.rdu.redhat.com [172.16.50.24]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h4NBxEo11379; Fri, 23 May 2003 07:59:14 -0400 Subject: Re: gdb/Insight 5.3 really slow when stepping - patch submitted to gdb-patch list From: Keith Seitz To: Roland Schwingel Cc: gdb , "insight@sources.redhat.com" In-Reply-To: <3ECDED23.6050105@onevision.de> References: <3ECDED23.6050105@onevision.de> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Message-Id: <1053691465.1572.10.camel@lindt.uglyboxes.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 11:59:00 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg00308.txt.bz2 On Fri, 2003-05-23 at 02:42, Roland Schwingel wrote: > The last 2 days I made 2 postings here. Maybe they were not correctly > targeted. I today found the > gdb-patches mailinglist where I just sent a diff to concerning the gdbtk > stepping problem. Well, strictly speaking the patch should go to the insight list (insight at sources dot redhat dot com), where I would see it. However, I have to question why lookup_symtab is suddenly so painfully slow? I don't have a problem applying the patch, but I want to make sure first that you didn't uncover a real gdb problem that no one knows about. Hmm. You say you did this on 5.3 (for native cygwin?). What about a newer version -- have you tried a CVS snapshot or HEAD? I used to use cygwin a lot around 5.3 time frame -- it was never that slow. If I asked for a testcase which demonstrates the problem, do you think you could provide me with one? Keith