cvs.gedasymbols.org/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: djgpp/2003/05/13/15:15:11

From: Hans-Bernhard Broeker <broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: gprof with all zero execution times in version 2.03
Date: 13 May 2003 10:11:10 GMT
Organization: Aachen University of Technology (RWTH)
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <b9qgbu$ef9$1@nets3.rz.RWTH-Aachen.DE>
References: <200305121929 DOT h4CJTEN08938 AT delorie DOT com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: acp3bf.physik.rwth-aachen.de
X-Trace: nets3.rz.RWTH-Aachen.DE 1052820670 14825 137.226.32.75 (13 May 2003 10:11:10 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse AT rwth-aachen DOT de
NNTP-Posting-Date: 13 May 2003 10:11:10 GMT
Originator: broeker@
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

alrc AT task DOT com DOT br <alrc AT task DOT com DOT br> wrote:

> I work with DJGPP 2.3 (*.ver files: Djdev203.ver, Bnu213b.ver,
> Gcc32b.ver) and I want to use gprof, but its exit shows all
> functions (except __dpmi_int) with 0.00 % execution time.

There's more wrong than just a high percentage to ascribed to
__dpmi_int.  Note that your program only reports a cumulative time of
0.28 total, that's a measly 5 time samples (0.055 seconds each) for
gprof to work with, for the *whole* program!

Does three tenths of a second feel like a valid figure for the total
run time of your program?  If so, you should really try to generate a
test case that executes longer.  If not, something must have broken
the profile data collection methods, and you'll have to supply more
details, like: what platform did this happen on, what were the exact
compile and link flags you passed.

-- 
Hans-Bernhard Broeker (broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de)
Even if all the snow were burnt, ashes would remain.

- Raw text -


  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright © 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019