This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: VTA merge - introduction
Alexandre Oliva <email@example.com> writes:
>> What is the typical size impact on debug information with VTA turned
> I can get back to you with an answer, if you want, but I can tell you
> that the answer may still be quite misleading at this point.
I certainly appreciate that you want to merge this work into mainline
sooner rather than later. However, I'm sure you can see that it is
difficult to know just what to say when we don't know how much it will
cost and we don't know how good the eventual results will be. It will
be quite painful to remove this patch later if it turns out to cost too
much or to be ineffective.
Perhaps you could work toward minimizing your merge issues without
committing the compiler as a whole to the VTA approach. For example,
perhaps we could accept DEBUG_INSN_P as an alias for INSN_P, and you
could propose patches to change some code to use DEBUG_INSN_P where
appropriate. That would reduce your merge conflicts while still leaving
the main compiler in a state where it would be easy to
s/DEBUG_INSN_P/INSN_P/ later. I don't know what the other maintainers
would think of such an approach, though, and I also don't know whether
it would help with your merge issues.