diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'docs')
| -rw-r--r-- | docs/Glibc_vs_uClibc_Differences.txt | 31 |
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/ + |