|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
profiling C code an generating call graphs
Hi, I want to profile a C program I am writting, so I compile it with -pg options and use gprof to obtain information about call graphs, which I am really interested in. I look at the text files but when I have a large number of functions, it looks really embarrasing. So somebody recommended me about graphviz. My problem was to find something to convert between gprof format and graphviz .dot format. I finally found gprof2dot.py and tried. But it only converts percentage time functions, and what I want is the call graph. Do you know how to get it with these programs or there around there are another ones capable of doing so ? If not, what software could I use to obtain call graphs from gprof ? Thanks.
In article <1180388065.305047.201@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, <horacius. @gmail.com> wrote: >I want to profile a C program I am writting, so I compile it with -pg >options and use gprof to obtain information about call graphs, which I >am really interested in. Profiling, specific compiler options, call graphs, and gprof are all not part of the C language itself. I suggest you ask in a newsgroup that deals with the toolset that includes gprof; possibly one of the gnu.utils.* newsgroups, or gnu.gcc.help possibly. -- "No one has the right to destroy another person's belief by demanding empirical evidence." -- Ann Landers
horacius.@gmail.com said: > Hi, > I want to profile a C program I am writting, so I compile it with -pg > options and use gprof to obtain information about call graphs, which I > am really interested in. I look at the text files but when I have a > large number of functions, it looks really embarrasing. So somebody > recommended me about graphviz.
Way to go, definitely, if you can't get cflow to work (and believe me, that's harder than it sounds). > My problem was to find something to > convert between gprof format and graphviz .dot format. I finally found > gprof2dot.py and tried. But it only converts percentage time > functions, and what I want is the call graph.
Well, let's see... The gprof output is in several sections. The first of these contains a list of the functions that it profiled: Flat profile: Each sample counts as 0.01 seconds. % cumulative self self total time seconds seconds calls ms/call ms/call name 34.12 1.44 1.44 9 160.00 160.00 XORBuffer 27.73 2.61 1.17 37952262 0.00 0.00 Subst 12.56 3.14 0.53 37952263 0.00 0.00 GetSBoxCount 12.56 3.67 0.53 9 58.89 58.89 RotateBufferLeft 12.56 4.20 0.53 1 530.00 4220.00 encrypt 0.47 4.22 0.02 2 10.00 10.00 GetFileLength 0.00 4.22 0.00 1 0.00 0.00 CheckArgs 0.00 4.22 0.00 1 0.00 10.00 GetPass followed by a blank line, and then some explanatory text. As you can see, the names on the right side of this section are what we're after, but this isn't really the best place to capture them. See below. Do this: printf("digraph g\n{\n"); In due course, the phrase "Call graph" appears for the first time - and that's a useful marker for your parsing process. The following five lines can be ignored, and then we get output like this: 0.53 3.69 1/1 main [2] [1] 100.0 0.53 3.69 1 encrypt [1] 1.17 0.53 37952262/37952262 Subst [3] 1.44 0.00 9/9 XORBuffer [4] 0.53 0.00 9/9 RotateBufferLeft [6] 0.01 0.00 1/2 GetFileLength [7] 0.00 0.01 1/1 GetPass [8] 0.00 0.00 1/37952263 GetSBoxCount [5] ----------------------------------------------- POINT A (see below for why I wrote this here) So - whilst you don't encounter a [number in square brackets] on the left, ignore the line and read another. Once you encounter the square bracket as the first character, you're at a calling function. To get at its name, start at the end, skip backwards past the bracketed number at the very end, and past the space (banging a '\0' in your buffer at this point will be a useful thing to do), and then keep going backwards through the name itself until you hit whitespace again. Slide forward again to the first character of the function name. Store that name, and then roll through each subsequent line (stopping when you hit a line that starts with ---- characters), parsing out the called function in the same way as above, and doing this for each line: printf(" %s -> %s;\n", callingfunctionname, calledfunctionname); for each function name that appears in these subsequent lines. If the next line is blank, you're done. Otherwise, repeat from POINT A. When you finally hit that blank line, write this: printf("}\n"); and you're done. It's ready to go through dot. I haven't actually written the code (although I'm very tempted to do just that), but if I work this algorithm by hand on a program whose profile I've just generated for this article, I get the following dot file: digraph g { encrypt -> Subst; encrypt -> XORBuffer; encrypt -> RotateBufferLeft; encrypt -> GetFileLength; encrypt -> GetPass; encrypt -> GetSBoxCount; main -> encrypt; main -> CheckArgs; Subst -> GetSBoxCount; GetPass -> GetFileLength; }
How you use dot to render this into an image is of course off-topic, but I can attest to the fact that it gives a very nice call-graph indeed. Furthermore, the C code you'll need for this is reasonably simple, and shouldn't take you more than an hour or so to write and test. Using gprof and dot in combination to get a graphical representation of the program's call graph is an interesting idea. (I'd thought of the dot part before, of course, but not the gprof part.) Do let us know how you get on with it. And if you don't, I might have to write it myself (any decade now), just to scratch that itch. -- Richard Heathfield "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999 http://www.cpax.org.uk email: rjh at the above domain, - www.
On Mon, 28 May 2007 22:41:43 +0000, Richard Heathfield <r@see.sig.invalid> wrote in comp.lang.c:
> horacius. @gmail.com said: > > Hi, > > I want to profile a C program I am writting, so I compile it with -pg > > options and use gprof to obtain information about call graphs, which I > > am really interested in. I look at the text files but when I have a > > large number of functions, it looks really embarrasing. So somebody > > recommended me about graphviz. > Way to go, definitely, if you can't get cflow to work (and believe me, > that's harder than it sounds). > > My problem was to find something to > > convert between gprof format and graphviz .dot format. I finally found > > gprof2dot.py and tried. But it only converts percentage time > > functions, and what I want is the call graph. > Well, let's see... > The gprof output is in several sections. The first of these contains a > list of the functions that it profiled:
[snip] Where, in any version of ISO 9899, is "gprof output" defined? If you are proud of yourself for having mastered a difficult, and off-topic for clc, tool chain, and are eager to share your knowledge, do so by email. And include the fact that the question was off-topic. Thank you. -- Jack Klein Home: http://JK-Technology.Com FAQs for comp.lang.c http://c-faq.com/ comp.lang.c++ http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/ alt.comp.lang.learn.c-c++ http://www.club.cc.cmu.edu/~ajo/docs/FAQ-acllc.html
In article <78qm531nttobha688u08jcrsin9cftj@4ax.com>, Jack Klein <jackkl@spamcop.net> wrote: >On Mon, 28 May 2007 22:41:43 +0000, Richard Heathfield ><r @see.sig.invalid> wrote in comp.lang.c: >[description of processing gprof output] >If you are proud of yourself for having mastered a difficult, and >off-topic for clc, tool chain, and are eager to share your knowledge, >do so by email. And include the fact that the question was off-topic. I urge other readers to use comp.lang.c for interesting, relevant, and informative articles such as Richard Heathfield's. -- Richard -- "Consideration shall be given to the need for as many as 32 characters in some alphabets" - X3.4, 1963.
Jack Klein said: > On Mon, 28 May 2007 22:41:43 +0000, Richard Heathfield > <r @see.sig.invalid> wrote in comp.lang.c: <snip> >> The gprof output is in several sections. The first of these contains >> a list of the functions that it profiled: > [snip] > Where, in any version of ISO 9899, is "gprof output" defined?
Nowhere, obviously - but what I was trying to demonstrate was that to write this C program for himself is not so daunting as the OP appeared to believe. I happen to think that encouraging people to write C programs is a Good Thing, and topical to boot. It is very easy to dismiss an article as off-topic, but rather harder to dig into it a little way and find something topical to discuss. > If you are proud of yourself for having mastered a difficult, and > off-topic for clc, tool chain
Where did *that* come from? Did you get out of bed the wrong side this morning or something? And since when were gprof and dot difficult? And since when were we not allowed even to *mention* tools? A quick Google search reveals that you yourself are not averse to discussing lint and even gcc on occasion. No version of ISO 9899 mentions these tools, either. In any case, I was careful to avoid any detailed discussion of gprof or dot - all I did was look at the format of the output that gprof produces, and demonstrate how it could be turned into a dot file, provided only that the OP was prepared to spend a little time and effort writing the C code that would perform this transformation. <snip> -- Richard Heathfield "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999 http://www.cpax.org.uk email: rjh at the above domain, - www.
horacius.@gmail.com skrev:
> Hi, > I want to profile a C program I am writting, so I compile it with -pg > options and use gprof to obtain information about call graphs, which I > am really interested in. I look at the text files but when I have a > large number of functions, it looks really embarrasing. So somebody > recommended me about graphviz. My problem was to find something to > convert between gprof format and graphviz .dot format. I finally found > gprof2dot.py and tried. But it only converts percentage time > functions, and what I want is the call graph. > Do you know how to get it with these programs or there around there > are another ones capable of doing so ? > If not, what software could I use to obtain call graphs from gprof ? > Thanks.
I found this tool http://www.ida.liu.se/~vaden/cgdi/ witch can generate call graphs, maybe can by useful ?
ok, I tried but when getting vcg, I try to compile on suse 10.1 and no way ! (this program last version is of 1995) there is another place to get "vcg" ? Thanks On May 29, 9:12 am, Carramba <u@example.net> wrote:
> horacius. @gmail.com skrev: > > Hi, > > I want to profile a C program I am writting, so I compile it with -pg > > options and use gprof to obtain information about call graphs, which I > > am really interested in. I look at the text files but when I have a > > large number of functions, it looks really embarrasing. So somebody > > recommended me about graphviz. My problem was to find something to > > convert between gprof format and graphviz .dot format. I finally found > > gprof2dot.py and tried. But it only converts percentage time > > functions, and what I want is the call graph. > > Do you know how to get it with these programs or there around there > > are another ones capable of doing so ? > > If not, what software could I use to obtain call graphs from gprof ? > > Thanks. > I found this toolhttp://www.ida.liu.se/~vaden/cgdi/witch can generate > call graphs, maybe can by useful ?
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|