Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1647696 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-05-23 09:10 +0200 |
| Last post | 2017-05-23 09:30 +0200 |
| Articles | 2 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH 7/7] DWARF: add the config option Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-05-23 09:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH 7/7] DWARF: add the config option Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2017-05-23 09:30 +0200
| From | Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-23 09:10 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 7/7] DWARF: add the config option |
| Message-ID | <tKc78-8iP-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 10:32:06AM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote: > > But it does hurt, in the sense that the complicated format of DWARF CFI > > means the unwinder has to jump through a lot more hoops to read it. > > Why that matters, actually? Unwinder is nothing to be performance > oriented. And if somebody is doing a lot of unwinding during runtime, > they can switch to in-this-case-faster FP unwinder. perf (and ftrace) like the unwinder to be considered performance oriented.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-23 09:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tKcqu-8q9-17@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1647696 |
* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote: > On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 10:32:06AM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote: > > > But it does hurt, in the sense that the complicated format of DWARF CFI > > > means the unwinder has to jump through a lot more hoops to read it. > > > > Why that matters, actually? Unwinder is nothing to be performance > > oriented. And if somebody is doing a lot of unwinding during runtime, > > they can switch to in-this-case-faster FP unwinder. > > perf (and ftrace) like the unwinder to be considered performance > oriented. Yes, and given how critical debugging is there's a kind of useful synergy here: overall the perf unwinder is run about 10 orders of magnitude more often than the debugging unwinder, so it's a very big help in shaking out unwinder/debug-info bugs and increasing robustness overall. The 'price' for using the unwinder in perf is that it has to be fast. Thanks, Ingo
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web