Re: Super bad accuracy in the output of gprof when is used -pg.

2007-04-06 Thread Joe Buck
On Sat, Apr 07, 2007 at 05:23:42AM +0200, J.C. Pizarro wrote: > I've probed the profiling of p7zip-4.44 (c++, lzma, > linux-2.6.20.5.tar as data). > > There is an absolute lack of profile timing information because of > a lot of 0.00 and little bit of 0.01. There is not entry of >0.01 seconds. Y

Re: Super bad accuracy in the output of gprof when is used -pg.

2007-04-06 Thread J.C. Pizarro
The name 'seconds' must be replaced by 'us' (microseconds) or 'ms' (milliseconds). So, then, they won't have many 0.00 us instead of 0.00 s. An advice, extend it from 2 to 4 decimal digits for better comparison between similar functions. * 0. us instead of 0.00 us * 0. ms instead of 0.0

Super bad accuracy in the output of gprof when is used -pg.

2007-04-06 Thread J.C. Pizarro
I've probed the profiling of p7zip-4.44 (c++, lzma, linux-2.6.20.5.tar as data). There is an absolute lack of profile timing information because of a lot of 0.00 and little bit of 0.01. There is not entry of >0.01 seconds. Its output really confuses me and your. The name 'seconds' must be repl