[issue16672] improve tracing performances when f_trace is NULL

Xavier de Gaye added the comment: A patch proposed in issue 20041 provides a backward compatible solution to this performance enhancement. -- ___ Python tracker ___

[issue16672] improve tracing performances when f_trace is NULL

Changes by Benjamin Peterson : -- resolution: -> rejected status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing

[issue16672] improve tracing performances when f_trace is NULL

Xavier de Gaye added the comment: status should be close, I guess. -- ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubsc

[issue16672] improve tracing performances when f_trace is NULL

Xavier de Gaye added the comment: It is not possible to improve the performances of the trace function set with sys.settrace without breaking backward compatibility for PyEval_SetTrace or without introducing a new PyEval_xxx of some sort. Yes, I suggest to revert this patch. -- ___

[issue16672] improve tracing performances when f_trace is NULL

Roundup Robot added the comment: New changeset cd87afe18ff8 by Benjamin Peterson in branch 'default': revert #16672 for incorrect semantics http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/cd87afe18ff8 -- ___ Python tracker __

[issue16672] improve tracing performances when f_trace is NULL

Jesús Cea Avión added the comment: So, Xavier, are you saying that you are reverting the patch?. Could be possible to provide a "good" patch, with a correct test of the situation you describe? Or are you suggesting just revert this and close this bugentry for good?. -- resolution: fix

[issue16672] improve tracing performances when f_trace is NULL

Xavier de Gaye added the comment: The patch applied to the default branch should be reverted. The 2.7 _hotshot extension module follows the specifications of PyEval_SetTrace: """Set the tracing function to func. This is similar to PyEval_SetProfile(), except the tracing function does receiv

[issue16672] improve tracing performances when f_trace is NULL

Xavier de Gaye added the comment: One may argue that this is not only a performances patch and that it fixes the wasting of cpu resources when tracing is on. Wasting cpu resources is a bug. Anyway, this is fine with me to close this minor issue on 2.7. The test_hotshot test is ok on my linux box

[issue16672] improve tracing performances when f_trace is NULL

Benjamin Peterson added the comment: That, too. -- resolution: -> fixed status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs

[issue16672] improve tracing performances when f_trace is NULL

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: I don't think performance patches should be committed to bugfix branches (especially 2.7 which is in slow maintenance mode). Recommend closing. -- nosy: +pitrou ___ Python tracker

[issue16672] improve tracing performances when f_trace is NULL

Benjamin Peterson added the comment: This patch causes test_hotshot to fail. -- ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing li

[issue16672] improve tracing performances when f_trace is NULL

Jesús Cea Avión added the comment: Benjamin, ans the previous commiter, could you possibly check the 2.7 proposed patch? -- ___ Python tracker ___ __

[issue16672] improve tracing performances when f_trace is NULL

Changes by Jesús Cea Avión : -- assignee: -> benjamin.peterson nosy: +benjamin.peterson resolution: fixed -> stage: committed/rejected -> patch review status: closed -> open ___ Python tracker ___

[issue16672] improve tracing performances when f_trace is NULL

Xavier de Gaye added the comment: Attached is a patch for the current head of 2.7. It would nice to have this patch on 2.7 too. With this patch, an implementation of pdb running on 2.7 with an extension module, runs at 1.2 times the speed of the interpreter when the trace function is active (see

[issue16672] improve tracing performances when f_trace is NULL

Changes by Jesús Cea Avión : -- nosy: +jcea ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.

[issue16672] improve tracing performances when f_trace is NULL

Roundup Robot added the comment: New changeset 1fb26db7d719 by Benjamin Peterson in branch 'default': improve tracing performance when f_trace is NULL (closes #16672) http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/1fb26db7d719 -- nosy: +python-dev resolution: -> fixed stage: -> committed/rejected st

[issue16672] improve tracing performances when f_trace is NULL

Changes by Andrew Svetlov : -- nosy: +asvetlov ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.pyth

[issue16672] improve tracing performances when f_trace is NULL

Changes by Antoine Pitrou : -- nosy: +belopolsky, georg.brandl ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe:

[issue16672] improve tracing performances when f_trace is NULL

Xavier de Gaye added the comment: > When f_trace is NULL, only PyTrace_CALL tracing events trigger the invocation > of the trace function (see trace_trampoline). This may be confusing. I meant that when f_trace is NULL, PyTrace_LINE, PyTrace_RETURN and PyTrace_EXCEPTION are not traced.

[issue16672] improve tracing performances when f_trace is NULL

Changes by Xavier de Gaye : Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file28299/bar.py ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsub

[issue16672] improve tracing performances when f_trace is NULL

Changes by Xavier de Gaye : Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file28298/foo.py ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsub

[issue16672] improve tracing performances when f_trace is NULL

New submission from Xavier de Gaye: When f_trace is NULL, only PyTrace_CALL tracing events trigger the invocation of the trace function (see trace_trampoline). maybe_call_line_trace() does quite some work though _PyCode_CheckLineNumber to find out if the instruction should be traced, and all this