[PATCH] you can use this patch to profile cygwin

[jojelino]

And, as usual, the formatting is completely off so it couldn't be
incorporated into the source code as is regardless.

But i don't know where the formatting guideline is. may i ask you giving
me the link?

[Corinna Vinschen]

Post by jojelino

And, as usual, the formatting is completely off so it couldn't be
incorporated into the source code as is regardless.

But i don't know where the formatting guideline is. may i ask you
giving me the link?

http://cygwin.com/contrib.html, see the Section "When you have finalized
your changes"

http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/Writing-C.html#Writing-C
http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/Change-Logs.html


Corinna

[Christopher Faylor]

Post by Corinna Vinschen

Post by jojelino

And, as usual, the formatting is completely off so it couldn't be
incorporated into the source code as is regardless.

But i don't know where the formatting guideline is. may i ask you
giving me the link?

http://cygwin.com/contrib.html, see the Section "When you have finalized
your changes"
http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/Writing-C.html#Writing-C

Huh. I don't see that on the contrib.html page even though I would have
sworn it was there. It is now.

cgf

[Ryan Johnson]

Post by Christopher Faylor

Post by Corinna Vinschen

Post by jojelino

And, as usual, the formatting is completely off so it couldn't be
incorporated into the source code as is regardless.

But i don't know where the formatting guideline is. may i ask you
giving me the link?

http://cygwin.com/contrib.html, see the Section "When you have finalized
your changes"
http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/Writing-C.html#Writing-C

Huh. I don't see that on the contrib.html page even though I would have
sworn it was there. It is now.

Could you please also add some guidance on what should be attached vs.
inlined in a patch submission? That has tripped me up in the past.

Ryan

Post by Christopher Faylor
cgf

[jojelino]

Post by jojelino

And, as usual, the formatting is completely off so it couldn't be
incorporated into the source code as is regardless.

But i don't know where the formatting guideline is. may i ask you giving
me the link?

The formatting is revised to adopt GNU code style (using Eclipse CDT).
and if you want make new-cygwin1.dll to profiling itself, please command

cd i686-pc-cygwin/winsup/cygwin;rm *.o;make profile=1

it would work.
and there was some issue to winsup/Makefile.common, simply expanding
ALL_CFLAGS resulted in CFLAGS are not expanded to ALL_CFLAGS. in cases
of gmon.c,

gcc -L/tmp/winsup/i686-pc-cygwin/winsup
-L/tmp/winsup/i686-pc-cygwin/winsup/cygwin
-L/tmp/winsup/i686-pc-cygwin/winsup/w32api/lib -isystem
/tmp/winsup/winsup/include -isystem /tmp/winsup/winsup/cygwin/include
-isystem /tmp/winsup/winsup/w32api/include
-B/tmp/winsup/i686-pc-cygwin/newlib/ -isystem
/tmp/winsup/i686-pc-cygwin/newlib/targ-include -isystem
/tmp/winsup/newlib/libc/include -c -Wall -Wstrict-aliasing
-Wwrite-strings -fno-common -pipe -fbuiltin -fmessage-length=0 -I.
-I/tmp/winsup/winsup/cygwin -I/tmp/winsup/winsup/w32api/include
-I../../.././winsup/cygwin/config/i386
-I/usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-cygwin/4.7.0/include -o ./gmon.o
/tmp/winsup/winsup/cygwin/gmon.c

after replacing simple expansion to recursively expansion, CFLAGS are
expanded properly. is it intended one?

gcc -L/tmp/winsup/i686-pc-cygwin/winsup
-L/tmp/winsup/i686-pc-cygwin/winsup/cygwin
-L/tmp/winsup/i686-pc-cygwin/winsup/w32api/lib -isystem
/tmp/winsup/winsup/include -isystem /tmp/winsup/winsup/cygwin/include
-isystem /tmp/winsup/winsup/w32api/include
-B/tmp/winsup/i686-pc-cygwin/newlib/ -isystem
/tmp/winsup/i686-pc-cygwin/newlib/targ-include -isystem
/tmp/winsup/newlib/libc/include -c -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -O4
-fomit-frame-pointer -mstackrealign -march=core2 -g -mfpmath=sse -MMD
-fmerge-constants -ftracer -mno-use-libstdc-wrappers -Wall
-Wstrict-aliasing -Wwrite-strings -fno-common -pipe -fbuiltin
-fmessage-length=0 -I. -I/tmp/winsup/winsup/cygwin
-I/tmp/winsup/winsup/w32api/include
-I../../.././winsup/cygwin/config/i386
-I/usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-cygwin/4.7.0/include -o ./gmon.o
/tmp/winsup/winsup/cygwin/gmon.c

[jojelino]

Post by jojelino
cd i686-pc-cygwin/winsup/cygwin;rm *.o;make profile=1
it would work.

Please ignore attachment from 6:48, i have mistaken by attaching
invalid winsup-profile-support.diff

So i am replying.

[jojelino]

Post by jojelino
cd i686-pc-cygwin/winsup/cygwin;rm *.o;make profile=1
it would work.

Please ignore attachment from 6:48, i have mistaken by attaching
invalid winsup-profile-support.diff

So i am replying.

[Corinna Vinschen]

Hi Jin-woo,

Post by jojelino

Post by jojelino
cd i686-pc-cygwin/winsup/cygwin;rm *.o;make profile=1
it would work.

Please ignore attachment from 6:48, i have mistaken by attaching
invalid winsup-profile-support.diff
So i am replying.

Yes, but to the wrong list ;-)

Would you mind to resend your patches as a reply to your original
threada on the cygwin-patches list? That's where the official
patch submissions are suppsoed to go.

Btw., you don't have to attach the ChangeLog. For the lazy reader
it's easier if the ChangeLog is just inline in your mail. If you
want to avoid more spam, just omit your email address from the
ChangeLog date/name/email header.

But there's something I don't grok in your patch:

In dll_crt0_0:

+ _monstartup();

but

+#ifdef PROFILE
+ atexit (&_mcleanup);
+#endif

Shouldn't the call to _monstartup also be guarded with #ifdef PROFILE?
Same question for calls to profile_thread_off and any other profiling
code in other places.

In gcrt0.c:

+#ifndef PROFILE
void _monstartup (void) __attribute__((__constructor__));
-
+#endif

#if*n*def? Is that a typo?


Corinna