That first screenshot definitely looks wrong, yeah... weird.

I'd try on latest (dev/canary), and if you still see that problem, please
file a chromium bug.

On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 6:01 AM Brian Craft <[email protected]> wrote:

> _main doesn't call baos_push directly. Also, there isn't an inlining
> scenario that would explain the stacktraces. Disabling inlining across
> translation units doesn't affect the stacktraces.
>
> Attaching a couple screenshots. One is a single stacktrace, fully
> expanded. The other is a bunch of other wasm functions, where you can see
> they're all the same, and don't show any wasm->wasm calls.
>
> https://imgur.com/on5tkhw
>
> https://imgur.com/P0jenT6
>
> On Thursday, January 16, 2020 at 7:20:42 AM UTC-8, Alon Zakai wrote:
>>
>> Those stack traces look like _main() (likely a JS wrapper) calls
>> baos_push() or hfc_lookup(). Are those not correct stack traces? They do
>> look a little odd as I'd expect to see main() (not a JS wrapper, but in
>> wasm) in the middle, at least.
>>
>> If you were expecting more stack traces to be profiled, perhaps the
>> random sampling didn't happen to pick any up because the sample was too
>> short and those stack traces too rare?
>>
>> If you have a testcase you can share, I can take a look - I don't think
>> I've seen something like this before, could be a bug. Or a screenshot might
>> help too, maybe the UI is confusing (can try changing between top-down and
>> bottom-up displays in the profiler perhaps, one might be less clear than
>> the other).
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 2:36 PM Brian Craft <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> When using the chrome profiler, the stack traces for wasm functions are
>>> all identical. Like so:
>>>
>>> WASM_function#25:module:_baos_push
>>>   js-to-wasm#93:export:js-to-wasm#93
>>>     Module._main
>>>
>>> WASM_function#101:module:_hfc_lookup
>>>   js-to-wasm#93:export:js-to-wasm#93
>>>     Module._main
>>>
>>> Is this expected? What does it mean? To be clear, I was expecting the
>>> stack to show the calls between the different wasm functions, as you would
>>> see if profiling on other platforms.
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "emscripten-discuss" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to [email protected].
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/emscripten-discuss/72936834-2682-4ca4-8fa7-5b03fce1a5f5%40googlegroups.com
>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/emscripten-discuss/72936834-2682-4ca4-8fa7-5b03fce1a5f5%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>> .
>>>
>> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "emscripten-discuss" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/emscripten-discuss/f6c4cf07-07d2-4929-b7e5-10c178dd971e%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/emscripten-discuss/f6c4cf07-07d2-4929-b7e5-10c178dd971e%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"emscripten-discuss" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/emscripten-discuss/CAEX4NpTBm_QZmQCdjUwHxhNBJ%3DBGvHBgP0V5Mk49bj0q4i81Mg%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to