This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL303058: Remove an expensive lock from Timer (authored by
labath).
Changed prior to commit:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32823?vs=97973&id=98994#toc
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32823
scott.smith added a comment.
Can someone please commit this? Thank you!
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32823
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
labath accepted this revision.
labath added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
lgtm, thank you.
Comment at: unittests/Core/TimerTest.cpp:39
std::this_thread::sleep_for(std::chrono::milliseconds(10));
-Timer t2("CAT1", "");
+// Explicitly te
scott.smith added inline comments.
Comment at: unittests/Core/TimerTest.cpp:39
std::this_thread::sleep_for(std::chrono::milliseconds(10));
-Timer t2("CAT1", "");
+// Explicitly testing the same category as above.
+static Timer::Category tcat1b("CAT1");
--
scott.smith updated this revision to Diff 97973.
scott.smith marked 2 inline comments as done.
scott.smith added a comment.
remove same-name-different-site support from Timer::Category
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32823
Files:
include/lldb/Core/Timer.h
source/API/SystemI
labath added a comment.
Ok, then let's keep them. I don't mind changing all call sites -- having a
separate category object is the cleanest solution with least magic. However see
my comments about category naming and merging.
Comment at: unittests/Core/TimerTest.cpp:39
s
scott.smith updated this revision to Diff 97880.
scott.smith marked an inline comment as done.
scott.smith added a comment.
updated per review comments.
added a test to fix the Jurassic Park problem.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32823
Files:
include/lldb/Core/Timer.h
sou
I'd vote for keeping the timers if possible. Their job is to tell you "of the
time spent in some operation, how much was spent in say DWARF parsing", etc.
That has been useful on occasion.
Jim
> On May 4, 2017, at 2:12 PM, Scott Smith via Phabricator via lldb-commits
> wrote:
>
> scott.smi
scott.smith marked 3 inline comments as done.
scott.smith added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D32823#745799, @labath wrote:
> Seems reasonable, however: I am not sure who actually uses these timers. I'd
> be tempted to just remove the timers that are causing the contention.
IMO we sho
labath added a comment.
Don't forget to update the usages in unit tests (and make sure the
check-lldb-unit target passes).
Seems reasonable, however: I am not sure who actually uses these timers. I'd be
tempted to just remove the timers that are causing the contention.
Comme
scott.smith created this revision.
The Timer destructor would grab a global mutex in order to update execution
time. Add a class to define a category once, statically; the class adds itself
to an atomic singly linked list, and thus subsequent updates only need to use
an atomic rather than grab
11 matches
Mail list logo
