Re: Multi-threaded dwarf parsing
Pedro Alves <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.gdb.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
[Updated Tom's address] On 02/24/2016 02:45 AM, Simon Marchi wrote: > Hi all, > > When debugging large programs, simply loading the binary in gdb can take > a significant amount of time. I was wondering if the dwarf parsing > (building partial and/or full symtabs, I suppose) could be a good > candidate for parallelization. I did some quick checks to determine > that, at least when reading from my SSD drive, the operation is not > IO-bound. Also, according to my limited understanding of the Dwarf > format, it seems like the compilation units DIEs are entities that could > be processed independently. These two facts, if we assume they are > true, suggest that there is a good potential for performance gain here. > > I couldn't find anything on the mailing list about that, please point > out any discussion I might have missed. > > I found (and it was a very good surprise) this branch by Tom Tromey: > > https://github.com/tromey/gdb/tree/threaded-dwarf-reader > > According to his description (from https://github.com/tromey/gdb/wiki): > "I think it doesn't help any real-world case". I'd like to ask you > directly, Tom: now that you debug Firefox (i.e. a quite large program) > daily with gdb, are you still of the same opinion? Of course, I'm also > interested in what others have to say about that. Is it something that > would have value, you think? Making GDB load debug info faster, and making it take advantage of the multiple cores in most host machines nowadays definitely adds value. ( I'd also like to get threads into GDB for other reasons, so this would be a good trojan. Oh, whoops, did I say that out loud? :-) ) > > Also, since not so long ago, LLDB does it. Apparently, it "can > drastically incrase the speed of loading debug info" (sic). If it's > good for LLDB, I don't see why it wouldn't be good for GDB. > Ref: http://blog.llvm.org/2015/10/llvm-weekly-95-oct-26th-2015.html > > So, in a word, are there any gotchas or good reasons not do take this > path? The obvious gotchas are of course all the globals, and coming up with fine enough locking granularity that threads actually do run in parallel. Thanks, Pedro Alves