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>