Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 5 Apr 2002 12:31:04 -0800
From:      Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org>
To:        Alessandro de Manzano <adm@unixmania.net>
Cc:        hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Is a debug kernel slower than a non-debug one ?
Message-ID:  <20020405203104.GZ93885@elvis.mu.org>
In-Reply-To: <20020405220831.B14188@libero.sunshine.ale>
References:  <20020405215712.A14188@libero.sunshine.ale> <20020405200005.GY93885@elvis.mu.org> <20020405220831.B14188@libero.sunshine.ale>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Alessandro de Manzano <adm@unixmania.net> [020405 12:08] wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 05, 2002 at 12:00:05PM -0800, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> 
> Wow, thanks for the super-fast answer! :))
> 
> 
> > > on my production servers' kernel so in the very rare case of crash I'll
> > > got a crash dump ( I'ld use also options DDB_UNATTENDED) and could
> > > immediately have a backtrace report.
> > > 
> > > ..Am I crazy ? :-))
> > 
> > I don't think you'll notice a difference for most stuff, this is how
> 
> does the "-g" option (GCC option I guess) disable the "-O" optimizing
> option ?
> If "-g" simply attach the symbols and similar debug info to the
> executable I guess the kernel should not be slower, but I don't know
> GCC very well...

no it shouldn't however higher levels of optimization may obfuscate
the tracebacks you get because of the way the compiler reorders
code.

-- 
-Alfred Perlstein [alfred@freebsd.org]
'Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology,"
 start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.'
Tax deductible donations for FreeBSD: http://www.freebsdfoundation.org/

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020405203104.GZ93885>