MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.150.11.1 with SMTP id 1mr250613ybk.28.1246266596233; Mon, 29 
	Jun 2009 02:09:56 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 02:09:56 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <m37hz4w2jb.fsf@meta.mtv.corp.google.com>
X-IP: 213.120.90.67
References: <4dea126a-e830-4c76-a576-93c62488acac@g1g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> 
	<m37hz4w2jb.fsf@meta.mtv.corp.google.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-GB; rv:1.8.1.15) 
	Gecko/20080625 Ubuntu/7.10 (gutsy) Firefox/2.0.0.15,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
X-HTTP-Via: 1.1 wccp1.vg1.prd.bfs.wombatfs.com (squid)
Message-ID: <332d8c90-b5ff-46db-87ed-c85d9370cd4c@q14g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Cpu profiler: Nodes are not connected
From: Raju Mohanapu <raju.mohan...@gmail.com>
To: google-perftools <google-perftools@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Setting the CPUPROFILE didn't show any difference.

I had perftools 0.99 profiling successfully on few other multi-
threaded applications. So, I tried 0.99 build again on this one. And
to my surprise, the graph was perfect.

Any guess why an older build is good? Any specific configure/make
options that I should pay attention to in the new releases?

Thank you for your time

cheers
Raju

On Jun 22, 7:23 pm, Craig Silverstein <csilv...@google.com> wrote:
> } Any guess why its not able to link the method calls? Is that
> } something to do with stack unwind issues?
>
> It could be.  But on 32 bit machines, you'd expect stack unwinding to
> work ok.
>
> As an experiment, try commenting out the ProfilerStart/Stop calls, and
> then running your binary with
>    env CPUPROFILE=/var/tmp/whatever ./your_binary
>
> Does that graph look any better?
>