This is the mail archive of the gcc@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: SSA annotations memory use.

From: Andrew MacLeod <amacleod at redhat dot com>
To: Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz>
Cc: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>, Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>, stevenb at redhat dot com, gcc mailing list <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 10:41:01 -0500
Subject: Re: SSA annotations memory use.
References: <20041207141417.GN8515@kam.mff.cuni.cz> <1102430351.31213.10.camel@pain> <20041207145347.GA28520@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>

On Tue, 2004-12-07 at 09:53, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > On Tue, 2004-12-07 at 09:14, Jan Hubicka wrote:

> > when you analyze the function, how far into the compilation process do
> > you go?
> Not far at the moment - only cleanup the cfg and instrument for
> profilng.  Of course the plan is to optimize harder at this stage.
> Also I would expect that the caches would show up as different field in
> -fmem-report dump...

they wouldn't exist until you go into ssa anyway. They are hung off of
the stmt annotation.

Andrew

References:
- SSA annotations memory use.
  - From: Jan Hubicka
- Re: SSA annotations memory use.
  - From: Andrew MacLeod
- Re: SSA annotations memory use.
  - From: Jan Hubicka

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