From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Apr 17 12:21:52 2012 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Apr 2012 16:21:52 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38508 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SKBA7-0000XY-IL for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 17 Apr 2012 12:21:52 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:52939) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SK9I4-00065Z-Qv for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 17 Apr 2012 10:21:58 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SK9Hi-00020j-3s for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 17 Apr 2012 10:21:43 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI autolearn=unavailable version=3.3.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]:38465) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SK9Hi-00020Y-0s for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 17 Apr 2012 10:21:34 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:46742) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SK9Hc-0001aQ-QP for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Apr 2012 10:21:33 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SK9HU-0001xh-AH for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Apr 2012 10:21:28 -0400 Received: from schneider-inet.de ([85.214.76.205]:42588 helo=h1714509.stratoserver.net) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SK9HU-0001wc-3h for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Apr 2012 10:21:20 -0400 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60295 helo=schneider-inet.de) by h1714509.stratoserver.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SK9HG-0004Jk-Ax for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Apr 2012 16:21:12 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 16:21:05 +0200 From: Karl-Heinz Schneider To: Subject: 24.0.94; gdb-mi very slow on Windows Mail-Reply-To: Message-ID: X-Sender: karl-heinz@schneider-inet.de User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/0.5.4 X-Spam_score: -1.0 X-Spam_score_int: -9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: Spam detection software, running on the system "h1714509.stratoserver.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: I use Emacs for C/C++ development on Windows XP. Since update to Emacs 24.0.94 I discovered that debugging with gdb-mi is very slow. Right after starting debugging performance is ok, but after a while using the debugger (adding breakpoints, removing breakpoints setting conditions, etc...) becomes very very slow. [...] Content analysis details: (-1.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 208.118.235.17 X-Spam-Score: -6.9 (------) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 12:21:50 -0400 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list Reply-To: karl-heinz@schneider-inet.de List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -6.9 (------) I use Emacs for C/C++ development on Windows XP. Since update to Emacs 24.0.94 I discovered that debugging with gdb-mi is very slow. Right after starting debugging performance is ok, but after a while using the debugger (adding breakpoints, removing breakpoints setting conditions, etc...) becomes very very slow. After a while Emacs is consuming 100% of CPU power for a while just for typing a single character into the gdb-buffer (not sending it to GDB). GDB commands like "next" or "step" take then several seconds until all buffers are refreshed. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Apr 17 13:13:08 2012 Received: (at 11265) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Apr 2012 17:13:09 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38561 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SKBxg-0001k9-TT for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 17 Apr 2012 13:13:08 -0400 Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]:55830) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SKBxb-0001jc-Ci for 11265@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 17 Apr 2012 13:13:03 -0400 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0M2M00E00VT4TG00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for 11265@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 17 Apr 2012 20:12:44 +0300 (IDT) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.229.57.204]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0M2M00C2CVT7VQY0@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Tue, 17 Apr 2012 20:12:44 +0300 (IDT) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 20:10:56 +0300 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#11265: 24.0.94; gdb-mi very slow on Windows In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il To: karl-heinz@schneider-inet.de Message-id: <83zkaaqo67.fsf@gnu.org> References: X-Spam-Score: -1.2 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 11265 Cc: 11265@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -1.2 (-) > Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 16:21:05 +0200 > From: Karl-Heinz Schneider > > I use Emacs for C/C++ development on Windows XP. Since update to Emacs > 24.0.94 I discovered that debugging with gdb-mi is very slow. Which version did you upgrade from? IOW, with which version are you comparing the speed? > Right after starting debugging performance is ok, but after a while > using the debugger (adding breakpoints, removing breakpoints setting > conditions, etc...) becomes very very slow. > > After a while Emacs is consuming 100% of CPU power for a while just > for typing a single character into the gdb-buffer (not sending it to > GDB). > GDB commands like "next" or "step" take then several seconds until > all buffers are refreshed. When this slowdown happens, is the GDB interaction buffer displayed? If so, does it help to delete the window where the interaction buffer is shown, so that the buffer is not displayed in any window? (I'm trying to establish whether the slowness is related to display or to something else.) Another thing to try is start GDB like this: M-x gud-gdb RET and see if the resulting session is as fast as what you were used to before 24.0.94. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Apr 17 21:57:00 2012 Received: (at 11265) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Apr 2012 01:57:00 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39008 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SKK8h-00064s-Qy for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 17 Apr 2012 21:57:00 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([208.118.235.10]:58478 ident=Debian-exim) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SKK8f-00064l-TH for 11265@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 17 Apr 2012 21:56:58 -0400 Received: from bb116-14-12-6.singnet.com.sg ([116.14.12.6]:60549 helo=ulysses) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SKK8T-0001gT-7w; Tue, 17 Apr 2012 21:56:46 -0400 From: Chong Yidong To: karl-heinz@schneider-inet.de Subject: Re: bug#11265: 24.0.94; gdb-mi very slow on Windows References: <83zkaaqo67.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 09:56:37 +0800 In-Reply-To: <83zkaaqo67.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Tue, 17 Apr 2012 20:10:56 +0300") Message-ID: <87bompn6p6.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.95 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -6.9 (------) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 11265 Cc: Eli Zaretskii , 11265@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -6.9 (------) > When this slowdown happens, is the GDB interaction buffer displayed? > If so, does it help to delete the window where the interaction buffer > is shown, so that the buffer is not displayed in any window? > > Another thing to try is start GDB like this: > > M-x gud-gdb RET > > and see if the resulting session is as fast as what you were used to > before 24.0.94. In addition to what Eli suggested, try setting bidi-paragraph-direction to 'left in the *gud* buffer and see if it makes a difference in speed. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Apr 18 12:31:11 2012 Received: (at 11265) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Apr 2012 16:31:12 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40076 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SKXmd-0007lT-HZ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 12:31:11 -0400 Received: from mtaout21.012.net.il ([80.179.55.169]:54551) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SKXmY-0007kr-Ca for 11265@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 12:31:06 -0400 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout21.012.net.il by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0M2O00M00OJ34T00@a-mtaout21.012.net.il> for 11265@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 19:30:41 +0300 (IDT) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.228.105.225]) by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0M2O00LXJOJ2XMC0@a-mtaout21.012.net.il>; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 19:30:40 +0300 (IDT) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 19:30:39 +0300 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#11265: 24.0.94; gdb-mi very slow on Windows In-reply-to: <4a9b5bb0b0553d31ee6df5994fd8a56d@schneider-inet.de> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il To: karl-heinz@schneider-inet.de Message-id: <83r4vl6lzk.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83zkaaqo67.fsf@gnu.org> <4a9b5bb0b0553d31ee6df5994fd8a56d@schneider-inet.de> X-Spam-Score: -1.2 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 11265 Cc: 11265@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -1.2 (-) [Please keep the bug address on the CC list, so that this whole discussion gets archived.] > Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 08:53:16 +0200 > From: Karl-Heinz Schneider > > I discovered that the slowdown happens after restarting the process to > debug. > I did the following procedure: > > 1. Start the debugger (with process cmd-line). > 2. Enter run to start the process > 3. Debug the process > 4. Enter kill to stop the process > 5. Change code and recompile > 6. Start again with step 2 > > Doing this three or four times debugging starts to get slow. If you omit step 5, does the problem still happen? > All debugging is done within the gud buffer using GDB commands. If, instead of stopping the process in step 4, you kill the gud buffer through which you interact with GDB, do you still see the slowdown after several times that you kill and restart the debugging? From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Apr 18 12:32:25 2012 Received: (at 11265) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Apr 2012 16:32:25 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40080 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SKXnp-0007nI-0T for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 12:32:24 -0400 Received: from mtaout23.012.net.il ([80.179.55.175]:44777) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SKXnj-0007n4-A4 for 11265@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 12:32:19 -0400 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout23.012.net.il by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0M2O00I00OJZZC00@a-mtaout23.012.net.il> for 11265@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 19:31:38 +0300 (IDT) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.228.105.225]) by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0M2O00IPHOKOM2L0@a-mtaout23.012.net.il> for 11265@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 19:31:37 +0300 (IDT) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 19:31:40 +0300 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#11265: 24.0.94; gdb-mi very slow on Windows In-reply-to: <669ef4eefd097d3da673c9f368045ea2@schneider-inet.de> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il To: 11265@debbugs.gnu.org Message-id: <83pqb56lxv.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83zkaaqo67.fsf@gnu.org> <669ef4eefd097d3da673c9f368045ea2@schneider-inet.de> X-Spam-Score: -1.2 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 11265 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -1.2 (-) Forwarding this, for the record. > Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 08:11:13 +0200 > From: Karl-Heinz Schneider > > Previously I used Emacs 23.3. This version didn't use GDB/MI as far as > I > know. This worked very well most of the time. > > From the slowdown Emacs isn't affected completely. It's just working > with the > debugger buffer. Change the focus from any other buffer to the GUD > buffer or > typing in the GUD buffer is very slow. The slow down happens while > working with > GUD. I prefer the keyboard, so I enter the GDB commands into the GUD > buffer. > Any other not GUD related buffer works with usual speed. > > I tried gud-gdb as well. Speed is good but it has other drawbacks. It > doesn't > display the breakpoints within the source buffer and the gdb completion > doesn't > work. > > Kalle > From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Apr 18 13:01:25 2012 Received: (at 11265) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Apr 2012 17:01:25 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40095 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SKYFs-0008UG-Tg for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 13:01:24 -0400 Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]:56205) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SKYFn-0008Tw-Km for 11265@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 13:01:19 -0400 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0M2O00600PUZ3700@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for 11265@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 20:00:33 +0300 (IDT) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.228.105.225]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0M2O004T1PWVPYQ0@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 20:00:32 +0300 (IDT) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 20:00:40 +0300 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#11265: 24.0.94; gdb-mi very slow on Windows In-reply-to: <87bompn6p6.fsf@gnu.org> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il To: Chong Yidong Message-id: <83lilt6klj.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83zkaaqo67.fsf@gnu.org> <87bompn6p6.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.2 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 11265 Cc: karl-heinz@schneider-inet.de, 11265@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -1.2 (-) > From: Chong Yidong > Cc: Eli Zaretskii , 11265@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 09:56:37 +0800 > > In addition to what Eli suggested, try setting bidi-paragraph-direction > to 'left in the *gud* buffer and see if it makes a difference in speed. I doubt that this could be related, since each time you type "continue" in the gud buffer, there's an empty line after the "Continuing" response. Anyway, I did a long debugging session, got to about 1000 lines in the gud buffer, but didn't see any perceptible slowdown. So the reason is still unclear. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Apr 19 02:10:34 2012 Received: (at 11265) by debbugs.gnu.org; 19 Apr 2012 06:10:34 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40734 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SKkZd-0004eu-V9 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 19 Apr 2012 02:10:34 -0400 Received: from schneider-inet.de ([85.214.76.205]:40022 helo=h1714509.stratoserver.net) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SKkZb-0004em-7S for 11265@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 19 Apr 2012 02:10:32 -0400 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35670 helo=schneider-inet.de) by h1714509.stratoserver.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SKkZG-0005Fv-AE; Thu, 19 Apr 2012 08:10:12 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 08:10:09 +0200 From: Karl-Heinz Schneider To: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#11265: 24.0.94; gdb-mi very slow on Windows Mail-Reply-To: In-Reply-To: <83r4vl6lzk.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83zkaaqo67.fsf@gnu.org> <4a9b5bb0b0553d31ee6df5994fd8a56d@schneider-inet.de> <83r4vl6lzk.fsf@gnu.org> Message-ID: X-Sender: karl-heinz@schneider-inet.de User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/0.5.4 X-Spam_score: -1.0 X-Spam_score_int: -9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: Spam detection software, running on the system "h1714509.stratoserver.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: >> I discovered that the slowdown happens after restarting the process >> to >> debug. >> I did the following procedure: >> >> 1. Start the debugger (with process cmd-line). >> 2. Enter run to start the process >> 3. Debug the process >> 4. Enter kill to stop the process >> 5. Change code and recompile >> 6. Start again with step 2 >> >> Doing this three or four times debugging starts to get slow. > > If you omit step 5, does the problem still happen? [...] Content analysis details: (-1.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 11265 Cc: 11265@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list Reply-To: karl-heinz@schneider-inet.de List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) >> I discovered that the slowdown happens after restarting the process >> to >> debug. >> I did the following procedure: >> >> 1. Start the debugger (with process cmd-line). >> 2. Enter run to start the process >> 3. Debug the process >> 4. Enter kill to stop the process >> 5. Change code and recompile >> 6. Start again with step 2 >> >> Doing this three or four times debugging starts to get slow. > > If you omit step 5, does the problem still happen? Yes, the problem doesn't depend on recompiling. Its more to wait some seconds before begin a new debugging cycle. > >> All debugging is done within the gud buffer using GDB commands. > > If, instead of stopping the process in step 4, you kill the gud > buffer > through which you interact with GDB, do you still see the slowdown > after several times that you kill and restart the debugging? Killing the GUD buffer and starting a new debugging session totally recovers to original performance. Kalle From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Apr 20 03:50:20 2012 Received: (at 11265) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Apr 2012 07:50:20 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43432 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SL8bi-0005AR-40 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 20 Apr 2012 03:50:20 -0400 Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]:46025) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SL8bf-0005AB-Ms for 11265@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 20 Apr 2012 03:50:16 -0400 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0M2R00300P9IZP00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for 11265@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 20 Apr 2012 10:49:17 +0300 (IDT) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.228.105.225]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0M2R003WSPQ42UL0@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Fri, 20 Apr 2012 10:49:16 +0300 (IDT) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 10:49:19 +0300 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#11265: 24.0.94; gdb-mi very slow on Windows In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il To: karl-heinz@schneider-inet.de Message-id: <83fwbyj11c.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83zkaaqo67.fsf@gnu.org> <4a9b5bb0b0553d31ee6df5994fd8a56d@schneider-inet.de> <83r4vl6lzk.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.2 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 11265 Cc: 11265@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -1.2 (-) > Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 08:10:09 +0200 > From: Karl-Heinz Schneider > Cc: <11265@debbugs.gnu.org> > > >> I discovered that the slowdown happens after restarting the process > >> to > >> debug. > >> I did the following procedure: > >> > >> 1. Start the debugger (with process cmd-line). > >> 2. Enter run to start the process > >> 3. Debug the process > >> 4. Enter kill to stop the process > >> 5. Change code and recompile > >> 6. Start again with step 2 > >> > >> Doing this three or four times debugging starts to get slow. > > > > If you omit step 5, does the problem still happen? > > Yes, the problem doesn't depend on recompiling. Its more to wait some > seconds before begin a new debugging cycle. > > > > >> All debugging is done within the gud buffer using GDB commands. > > > > If, instead of stopping the process in step 4, you kill the gud > > buffer > > through which you interact with GDB, do you still see the slowdown > > after several times that you kill and restart the debugging? > > Killing the GUD buffer and starting a new debugging session totally > recovers to original performance. If you can try the current development code on the emacs-24 branch, please see if the problem is still there. Some related problems were fixed recently, and maybe they also fix your problem. If you cannot try the current code, please revisit this after the next pretest version is released, and report back. Thanks. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Apr 24 10:58:17 2012 Received: (at 11265) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Apr 2012 14:58:18 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50865 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SMhC5-0007rw-4R for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 10:58:17 -0400 Received: from schneider-inet.de ([85.214.76.205]:51646 helo=h1714509.stratoserver.net) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SMhC1-0007rn-VH for 11265@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 10:58:15 -0400 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50316 helo=schneider-inet.de) by h1714509.stratoserver.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SMhBC-00016y-T6; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 16:57:24 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 16:57:22 +0200 From: Karl-Heinz Schneider To: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#11265: 24.0.94; gdb-mi very slow on Windows Mail-Reply-To: In-Reply-To: <83fwbyj11c.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83zkaaqo67.fsf@gnu.org> <4a9b5bb0b0553d31ee6df5994fd8a56d@schneider-inet.de> <83r4vl6lzk.fsf@gnu.org> <83fwbyj11c.fsf@gnu.org> Message-ID: X-Sender: karl-heinz@schneider-inet.de User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/0.5.4 X-Spam_score: -1.0 X-Spam_score_int: -9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: Spam detection software, running on the system "h1714509.stratoserver.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: > If you can try the current development code on the emacs-24 branch, > please see if the problem is still there. Some related problems were > fixed recently, and maybe they also fix your problem. If you cannot > try the current code, please revisit this after the next pretest > version is released, and report back. Thanks. [...] Content analysis details: (-1.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 11265 Cc: 11265@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list Reply-To: karl-heinz@schneider-inet.de List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) > If you can try the current development code on the emacs-24 branch, > please see if the problem is still there. Some related problems were > fixed recently, and maybe they also fix your problem. If you cannot > try the current code, please revisit this after the next pretest > version is released, and report back. Thanks. I just downloaded the zip-package 24.1.50 of emacs. The problem is still there. Kalle From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Nov 01 15:52:00 2019 Received: (at 11265) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Nov 2019 19:52:00 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57206 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iQcxk-0000If-BJ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 01 Nov 2019 15:52:00 -0400 Received: from host.gofardesign.uk ([208.79.239.190]:37927) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iQcxi-0000IP-5V for 11265@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 01 Nov 2019 15:51:58 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=marxist.se; s=default; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:References: In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=H5Ifjwda3AOgAbgghc78MOtbyepdLueBlVIT5moY81o=; b=Yr6uZ0jd/pc+TUbESVdqKtlwoi VuPz0V2hCA02lMLNQC3KKGisofao+sgwOPTrwhz7YNEm2FxlG6ZZib6QvbDZsaYb+JHz35T5E8ZMY GuPpdisXDKGS2NDyNRpdvHtHxezDJ1t9/KTFSh+oDNYYwLE1dpAdPFTC4tdoKo0ML9Ew=; Received: from h-70-69.a785.priv.bahnhof.se ([155.4.70.69]:51692 helo=localhost) by host.gofardesign.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1iQcxb-0006b9-P0; Fri, 01 Nov 2019 14:51:52 -0500 From: Stefan Kangas To: Karl-Heinz Schneider Subject: Re: bug#11265: 24.0.94; gdb-mi very slow on Windows In-Reply-To: (Karl-Heinz Schneider's message of "Tue, 24 Apr 2012 16:57:22 +0200") References: <83zkaaqo67.fsf@gnu.org> <4a9b5bb0b0553d31ee6df5994fd8a56d@schneider-inet.de> <83r4vl6lzk.fsf@gnu.org> <83fwbyj11c.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2019 20:51:50 +0100 Message-ID: <87sgn7xtm1.fsf@marxist.se> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - host.gofardesign.uk X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - debbugs.gnu.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - marxist.se X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: host.gofardesign.uk: authenticated_id: stefan@marxist.se X-Authenticated-Sender: host.gofardesign.uk: stefan@marxist.se X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 11265 Cc: Eli Zaretskii , 11265@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Karl-Heinz Schneider writes: >> If you can try the current development code on the emacs-24 branch, >> please see if the problem is still there. Some related problems were >> fixed recently, and maybe they also fix your problem. If you cannot >> try the current code, please revisit this after the next pretest >> version is released, and report back. Thanks. > > I just downloaded the zip-package 24.1.50 of emacs. The problem is > still there. This was 7 years ago. Are you still seeing this on a modern version of Emacs? Best regards, Stefan Kangas From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Nov 05 08:47:22 2019 Received: (at 11265-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 5 Nov 2019 13:47:22 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37971 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iRzB3-00069l-U6 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 05 Nov 2019 08:47:22 -0500 Received: from mail-pg1-f182.google.com ([209.85.215.182]:44446) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iRzAu-00069M-P8 for 11265-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 05 Nov 2019 08:47:15 -0500 Received: by mail-pg1-f182.google.com with SMTP id f19so5115681pgk.11 for <11265-done@debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 05 Nov 2019 05:47:12 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=XOKSlQCJ8XXeTwdR2LKbhZR0+k/+gFJeJlczFEvw9aA=; b=bnjxFRNMEvNZF/ZhTGljqKYIf8oP+SYX7uUM1ZxopmxCwGKvjo0NfW2EQQ9ImyemFR BrrGWXSK9dBrPY5pwEWjQCruD44wifUwTZvmQy5XKeivViSyT51K6Hc8ECowyW1+vUTy fbDaQ3OTc4fnQ8SKAjb4U4zJnkM5L8mGa9oXK1R6Dri1R5t+z+dUQ6yxMdh4ihhezx8X kl9FU8Bern+HhmMpLq5KqGoR/DPL1FLjELeJ2oC25GRVMv6gzH62a7mRzjqSrMM6hWAu uD6bCTw7jJ+rloa8CVKfUM3t29AnmCbAJysb90uBfv4IuudUkD2cOH2HFBjoKEdkw84f 2LXg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWrtR2osHsvf70EOobja0K1snXLYgWGeNu573Fsj/buPNoOoZ2z 04Q1JZhgFDIlelD9OmdpZlViAhDcufvNKOlilV6JsPne X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz7NErHN2dHgbTnVnke/XU34zcWQQsj6vMHMZl1H1NUpbXiqPpHqg1cmRyvbv2YDQKwivZaz9hBQf3HtRDzFT8= X-Received: by 2002:a63:7015:: with SMTP id l21mr33962341pgc.200.1572961626808; Tue, 05 Nov 2019 05:47:06 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <83zkaaqo67.fsf@gnu.org> <4a9b5bb0b0553d31ee6df5994fd8a56d@schneider-inet.de> <83r4vl6lzk.fsf@gnu.org> <83fwbyj11c.fsf@gnu.org> <87sgn7xtm1.fsf@marxist.se> <21C01CB2-EBC0-47D7-8F57-D5801A15C5FD@schneider-inet.de> In-Reply-To: <21C01CB2-EBC0-47D7-8F57-D5801A15C5FD@schneider-inet.de> From: Stefan Kangas Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2019 14:46:55 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: bug#11265: 24.0.94; gdb-mi very slow on Windows To: Karl-Heinz Schneider , 11265-done@debbugs.gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 11265-done X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) Karl-Heinz Schneider writes: > >This was 7 years ago. Are you still seeing this on a modern version of > >Emacs? > > I think you can close this issue. I even don't use Emacs anymore for C++ coding these days. I even forgot about it, sorry. Thanks for reporting back; closing the bug now. If anyone else is seeing this, please reopen the bug. Best regards, Stefan Kangas From unknown Tue Jun 17 01:34:27 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2019 12:24:05 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator