From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 170A53858C50 for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2022 06:09:45 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 170A53858C50 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1669961384; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=eXScKEdlYOwxAnSHrs+0KRrSk/sZBI9OK/VGOP81uDI=; b=gzRKyMIWQAFxj/hAxHxWRxj8Im2oZIS4KQ/I7kkh9DpWb7mMeQ10Wq1LGhbZExy9Y2wHuQ 1XKfP3d8CU7xZKdEBCnSiOaOv9X6w5s4azOM2dRGzly3/M9+cxz+69sHVbpCX8bY/IIdhE tfvMFLE/in645cKYnzFSKXhOfVOJ0xs= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-99--rFpCrclOjKIO-zoRkmggg-1; Fri, 02 Dec 2022 01:09:43 -0500 X-MC-Unique: -rFpCrclOjKIO-zoRkmggg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D116101A528; Fri, 2 Dec 2022 06:09:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from oldenburg.str.redhat.com (unknown [10.2.16.87]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 83F401402BDA; Fri, 2 Dec 2022 06:09:42 +0000 (UTC) From: Florian Weimer To: Samir Droubi via Libc-help Cc: Samir Droubi Subject: Re: ____wcstold_l_internal Question References: Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2022 07:09:38 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Samir Droubi via Libc-help's message of "Fri, 2 Dec 2022 05:39:11 +0000") Message-ID: <877czauyjh.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.7 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: * Samir Droubi via Libc-help: > I was profiling a project that I have been working on and the function > above shows up amongst other internal functions. I was wondering if > you could shed a light on what could possibly be happening to cause > calls to this function to be so frequent. Here is the profiling > result: > > 13.72% mitscriptbc libc.so.6 [.] ____wcstold_l_internal > 5.45% mitscriptbc libc.so.6 [.] ____wcstof_l_internal > 2.46% mitscriptbc libc.so.6 [.] round_and_return > 2.28% mitscriptbc libc.so.6 [.] ____wcstod_l_internal > > The libc version being used is 2.35. The external name is wcstold or wcstold_l. If your application isn't calling that, the profiling data is wrong. You might find out by setting a breakpoint or probe on the function. Thanks, Florian