This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [jit] Add a test of using very long names


On Fri, 2014-09-26 at 11:45 -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Sep 26, 2014, at 8:14 AM, David Malcolm <dmalcolm@redhat.com>
> wrote:
> > 	* jit.dg/test-long-names.c: New test case.
> 
> > +/* 65KB */
> > +#define NAME_LENGTH (65 * 1024)
> 
> 65K was a tiny name back in 1999, 16M was a large name then.  Today,
> 16M is tiny enough.  And yeah, this was a customer bug report, just
> normal C++ code with template manglings back then and yeah, we fixed
> the bug and tested it out to 16M to ensure we would not hit another
> bug in the next decade.  As far as I know, we didnât.  If you want to
> ensure it works nicely for the next decade test out to, say, 128M and
> then throw that test case away.  Iâd be curious if you hit any
> problems at 128M.

Out of curiosity I tried upping NAME_LENGTH to 129M.

The compiler handled it fine, but FWIW "as" seems to be stuck here:

(gdb) bt
#0  0x0000000000411730 in input_scrub_next_buffer (bufp=bufp@entry=0x693340) at input-scrub.c:390
#1  0x000000000041efab in read_a_source_file (name=<optimized out>) at read.c:768
#2  0x0000000000404188 in perform_an_assembly_pass (argv=0x88bee8, argc=<optimized out>) at as.c:1095
#3  main (argc=2, argv=0x88bee0) at as.c:1242

whilst reading a 952M .s file.

(binutils-2.23.88.0.1-13.fc20.x86_64, fwiw)



Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]