This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: thanks for the memory work
- From: law at redhat dot com
- To: Andrew MacLeod <amacleod at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz>, Steven Bosscher <s dot bosscher at student dot tudelft dot nl>, gcc mailing list <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 21:27:25 -0700
- Subject: Re: thanks for the memory work
- Reply-to: law at redhat dot com
In message <1069818411.22241.2204.camel@p4>, Andrew MacLeod writes:
>> Even if they come out of a single array, I don't see how that necessarily
>> helps the memory consumption problems -- since you've still got to
>> provide the operand walkers indices into that array.
>>
>Well, you avoid the overhead of having an array for each one, and if you
>have 328,000 of them, that has to be something at least. the GC doesnt
>have to deal with them.
But don't you still need a varrarys for the indices?
Or were you planning to have a single varray with all the operands and you
have to walk the entire varray examining the type of each element to know
if it's applicable?
>PLus, I was planning to do some thing about the 0
>and 1 DEF case, much like I did with immediate_uses, they oughtn't take
>much to deal with.
I definitely think dealing with the 0/1 def cases will be worthwhile.
Jeff