From:	Hans-Bernhard Broeker <broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: gprof with all zero execution times in version 2.03
Date:	13 May 2003 10:11:10 GMT
Organization:	Aachen University of Technology (RWTH)
Lines:	21
Message-ID:	<b9qgbu$ef9$1@nets3.rz.RWTH-Aachen.DE>
References:	<200305121929 DOT h4CJTEN08938 AT delorie DOT com>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	acp3bf.physik.rwth-aachen.de
X-Trace:	nets3.rz.RWTH-Aachen.DE 1052820670 14825 137.226.32.75 (13 May 2003 10:11:10 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:	abuse AT rwth-aachen DOT de
NNTP-Posting-Date:	13 May 2003 10:11:10 GMT
Originator:	broeker@
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

alrc AT task DOT com DOT br <alrc AT task DOT com DOT br> wrote:

> I work with DJGPP 2.3 (*.ver files: Djdev203.ver, Bnu213b.ver,
> Gcc32b.ver) and I want to use gprof, but its exit shows all
> functions (except __dpmi_int) with 0.00 % execution time.

There's more wrong than just a high percentage to ascribed to
__dpmi_int.  Note that your program only reports a cumulative time of
0.28 total, that's a measly 5 time samples (0.055 seconds each) for
gprof to work with, for the *whole* program!

Does three tenths of a second feel like a valid figure for the total
run time of your program?  If so, you should really try to generate a
test case that executes longer.  If not, something must have broken
the profile data collection methods, and you'll have to supply more
details, like: what platform did this happen on, what were the exact
compile and link flags you passed.

-- 
Hans-Bernhard Broeker (broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de)
Even if all the snow were burnt, ashes would remain.

- Raw text -