This is the mail archive of the gcc-bugs@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]

[Bug debug/36060] [4.3/4.4 Regression] Too big stack requirements of cc1plus during GC



------- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-04-27 11:06 -------
As most of the nested calls are due to following die_sib, out of the first
almost 46000 frames I've uped, there were:
20273  gt_ggc_m_10die_struct ((*x).die_sib);
 8878  gt_ggc_m_19VEC_dw_attr_node_gc ((*x).die_attr);
 8877  gt_ggc_m_10die_struct ((*x).base.vec[i0].dw_attr_val.v.val_die_ref.die);
 7220  gt_ggc_m_10die_struct ((*x).die_child);
the best fix is IMHO to mark die_sib as chain_next.  Unfortunately, the DIEs
are linked circularly through the die_sib field, so chain_next doesn't work
properly for that.  I'll post a patch which introduces chain_circular
alternative to chain_next.  With this patch, cc1plus with this testcase on
ppc64-linux native
compiles even with ulimit -s 500, which is 28 times lower stack usage than
before.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36060


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