low-level profiling

Nicolas Frisby nicolas.frisby at gmail.com
Mon Feb 18 18:37:33 CET 2013

Hmm. build.mk.sample includes


(so do the build.mk files I'm using)

Is that symbol for something else or is there a typo somewhere?

On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Simon Marlow <marlowsd at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 15/02/13 20:31, Johan Tibell wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 12:02 PM, Nicolas Frisby
>> <nicolas.frisby at gmail.com <mailto:nicolas.frisby at gmail.**com<nicolas.frisby at gmail.com>>>
>> wrote:
>>     Thanks for rallying everyone! I made a bit of a breakthrough while
>>     trying to pinpoint where the linker is invoked.
>>     Here's the situation:
>>        * If I use nofib's "make" command to build the text, the
>>     executable does not have the function symbols in its .text section.
>>     The .o files do have them.
>>        * If I use ghc --make instead, the symbols survive in the
>> executable.
>>     I'm not up to sleuthing out the details at the moment. Should I open
>>     a Trac ticket?
>> Sounds like make for nofib strips the executables after they are
>> created. That probably makes sense if nofib also measures executable
>> sizes, but it might screw you up here. Using ghc --make (command copied
>> form whatever nofib uses) is probably the right thing to do while you're
>> debugging any performance issues.
> Ah yes, I usually have
> in my mk/build.mk
> Probably a good idea to get rid of the stripping completely, it doesn't
> affect the size measurements anyway which use the 'size' command.
> Cheers,
>         Simon
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/attachments/20130218/294ef459/attachment.htm>

More information about the ghc-devs mailing list