From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:51900) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UaoD2-00056B-QS for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 10 May 2013 10:22:09 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UaoD1-0002DO-MK for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 10 May 2013 10:22:08 -0400 Received: from mail-oa0-f52.google.com ([209.85.219.52]:59401) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UaoD1-0002D9-Hu for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 10 May 2013 10:22:07 -0400 Received: by mail-oa0-f52.google.com with SMTP id h1so4867688oag.39 for ; Fri, 10 May 2013 07:22:07 -0700 (PDT) From: Anthony Liguori In-Reply-To: <518BF5A3.5040201@redhat.com> References: <20130509183029.GG31148@hall.aurel32.net> <518BF5A3.5040201@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 09:22:04 -0500 Message-ID: <87k3n6oqyb.fsf@codemonkey.ws> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Profiling sparc64 emulation List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini , Aurelien Jarno Cc: qemu-devel , Artyom Tarasenko , Torbjorn Granlund Paolo Bonzini writes: > Il 09/05/2013 20:30, Aurelien Jarno ha scritto: >> 13,16% libglib-2.0.so.0.3200.4 [.] g_hash_table_lookup >> 8,18% libglib-2.0.so.0.3200.4 [.] g_str_hash >> 2,47% qemu-system-ppc64 [.] object_class_dynamic_cast >> 1,97% qemu-system-ppc64 [.] type_is_ancestor > > That's worrisome, but should be easy to fix... can you make a callgraph > profile? So percentage of a profiling run doesn't imply a performance regression. Are there real performance numbers here? Regards, Anthony Liguori > > Paolo