From owner-freebsd-current Wed Oct 23 15:32:40 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id PAA16530 for current-outgoing; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 15:32:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA16524 for ; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 15:32:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id PAA10622; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 15:28:55 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199610232228.PAA10622@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: Is profiling code broken? To: sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu (Steven G. Kargl) Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 15:28:55 -0700 (MST) Cc: terry@lambert.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <199610232210.PAA07504@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> from "Steven G. Kargl" at Oct 23, 96 03:10:00 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > I would expect the second do loop to be removed by a decent optimizer; > > ij is not a dependent variable. Maybe the back end changed to 2.7.2 or > > the default optimization flags have changed in the compilation script? > > Okay, it was a simple example program. On my code with 5k lines that > can take an hour or more to run, I still get no profiling information > other than the number of times a function (subroutine) has been called. Right. The buckets are divided by address space into per symbol buckets. Profiling is, by definition, done at a per function granularity. What function are you calling that isn't showing up? Maybe a better question would be: what did you want it to show, as opposed to what it does show? Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.