summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/docs/Glibc_vs_uClibc_Differences.txt
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'docs/Glibc_vs_uClibc_Differences.txt')
-rw-r--r--docs/Glibc_vs_uClibc_Differences.txt31
1 files changed, 31 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/docs/Glibc_vs_uClibc_Differences.txt b/docs/Glibc_vs_uClibc_Differences.txt
index 0b78bf970..1983f45ba 100644
--- a/docs/Glibc_vs_uClibc_Differences.txt
+++ b/docs/Glibc_vs_uClibc_Differences.txt
@@ -175,3 +175,34 @@ glibc bugs that Ulrich Drepper has refused to acknowledge or comment on
and explicit UNDEFINED rules.
More to follow as I think of it...
+
+
+
+
+Profiling:
+-------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+uClibc no longer supports 'gcc -fprofile-arcs -pg' style profiling, which
+causes your application to generate a 'gmon.out' file that can then be analyzed
+by 'gprof'. Not only does this require explicit extra support in uClibc, it
+requires that you rebuild everything with profiling support. There is both a
+size and performance penalty to profiling your applications this way, as well
+as Heisenberg effects, where the act of measuring changes what is measured.
+
+These exist a number of less invasive alternatives that do not require your to
+specially instrument your application, and recompile and relink everything.
+
+Many people have had good results using the combination of Valgrind
+to generate profiling information and KCachegrind for analysis:
+ http://developer.kde.org/~sewardj/
+ http://kcachegrind.sourceforge.net/
+
+The OProfile system-wide profiler is another alternative:
+ http://oprofile.sourceforge.net/
+
+Prospect is another alternative based on OProfile:
+ http://prospect.sourceforge.net/
+
+And the Linux Trace Toolkit (LTT) is also a fine tool:
+ http://www.opersys.com/LTT/
+