From: Matt Rice <ratmice@gmail.com>
To: Christian Biesinger <cbiesinger@google.com>
Cc: Mike Gulick <mgulick@mathworks.com>,
Reuben Thomas via Gdb <gdb@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: GDB memory usage with compressed debug info
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2021 19:59:04 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACTLOFoKcra78diij0=+FVx-JKu5wxsHy=t3kscwt7hXwJYfLQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPTJ0XEohR74_BDD7Av8AZkyXFBQrfv_GXYMMAbmCnwxY+KOrw@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 6:16 PM Christian Biesinger via Gdb <
gdb@sourceware.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 7:38 PM Mike Gulick via Gdb <gdb@sourceware.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > On 3/16/21 2:40 PM, Mike Gulick wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I'm observing that GDB memory usage is much higher when I have debug
> > > info compressed with 'objcopy --compress-debug-sections'. In a large
> > > C++ application, I see the instance with uncompressed debug info use
> > > 46GB VIRTUAL memory and 11GB RSS, and the instance with compressed
> debug
> > > info is using 46GB VIRTUAL memory and 42GB RSS. In case it matters,
> the
> > > debug info is separated from the original binary into its own file.
> > >
> > > It seems like GDB must load the full uncompressed debug info into
> memory
> > > when the underlying files are compressed?
> > >
> > > I'm currently using GDB 9.2. I checked the 10.1 NEWS and didn't see
> > > anything that looked like it would have changed this result, but I'm
> > > happy to give it a try if you think it might help.
> > >
> > > Is there any chance this could be improved with a patch to GDB, or is
> > > this just the nature of compressed debug data?
> > >
> > > Also, FYI, the NEWS link for the GDB 10.1 release on the GDB home page
> > > points to the NEWS file for the 9.1 release.
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > -Mike
> >
> > I should add that this high memory usage only occurs when there is a
> > FILE:LINENUM breakpoint set (or pending). I can run the application
> > being debugged, observe that GDB's memory usage is around 11 or 12 GB,
> > then run 'b foobar.cpp:123', and the GDB memory usage will climb up to
> > 42 GB. Interesting that symbolic breakpoints don't trigger this high
> > memory usage, but line-based breakpoints do. Does this seem expected?
>
> I'm guessing that this is due to parsing full debug info ("expanding
> psymtabs") which is not necessary for symbolic breakpoints, which can
> rely on minsyms or maybe psymtabs. Have you tried using a heap
> profiler to see where the memory usage comes from?
>
It could possibly narrow it down if the behavior of FILE:label breakpoints
differ, though I'm not sure what to expect exactly.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-24 19:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-16 18:40 Mike Gulick
2021-03-18 18:38 ` Mike Gulick
2021-03-22 18:09 ` Christian Biesinger
2021-03-24 19:59 ` Matt Rice [this message]
2021-03-24 22:52 ` Mike Gulick
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CACTLOFoKcra78diij0=+FVx-JKu5wxsHy=t3kscwt7hXwJYfLQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=ratmice@gmail.com \
--cc=cbiesinger@google.com \
--cc=gdb@sourceware.org \
--cc=mgulick@mathworks.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).