This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Profiling gcc itself

From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>
To: Jeff Evarts <riventree at gmail dot com>
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, Basile Starynkevitch <basile at starynkevitch dot net>, n8tm at aol dot com
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 01:23:23 +0000
Subject: Re: Profiling gcc itself
References: <CADaSsY1s2U49=23jHsud9=N7m-DfM3FnJdaApv9BqpEP6SBEKw@mail.gmail.com> <20111120171010.65f79a2e8feaf35822776675@starynkevitch.net> <CADaSsY3gLQNg9pk-d6epDfFoOfiY09RU0ffnvGZhxUmq8xzNJA@mail.gmail.com>

On 21 November 2011 00:50, Jeff Evarts wrote:
> Seriously, I meant no offense, and didn't want to cause a stir.

I didn't interpret the replies as offended or stirred, I think they
were just saying "it's not clear from your question whether you are
already familiar with the most rudimentary* tools used for profiling
GCC or potentially reducing time spent in the preprocessor."


* and -ftime-report is useful, but quite rudimentary compared with a
full profile.

References:
- Profiling gcc itself
  - From: Jeff Evarts
- Re: Profiling gcc itself
  - From: Basile Starynkevitch
- Re: Profiling gcc itself
  - From: Jeff Evarts

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]