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: Free more of type decls


On Fri, 26 Oct 2018, Jan Hubicka wrote:

> > On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 9:12 AM Jan Hubicka <hubicka@ucw.cz> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > > this patch frees TYPE_DECL and alignment from TYPE_DECL and also preserves
> > > only those TYPE_DECL pointers that are actually used to build ODR type tree.
> > >
> > > It reduces number of TYPE_DECLs streamed from WPA to ltrans to about 20%
> > > and is important for the patch turning types to incomplete types.  Without
> > > this change the TREE_TYPE of TYPE_DECL would still point back to complete type
> > > and duplicating TYPE_DECLs as well is somewhat laborious.
> > 
> > So the following is the really important hunk, correct?
> > 
> > > @@ -5174,7 +5174,7 @@ free_lang_data_in_type (tree type)
> > >
> > >    /* Drop TYPE_DECLs in TYPE_NAME in favor of the identifier in the
> > >       TYPE_DECL if the type doesn't have linkage.  */
> > > -  if (! type_with_linkage_p (type))
> > > +  if (type != TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (type) || ! type_with_linkage_p (type))
> > >      {
> > >        TYPE_NAME (type) = TYPE_IDENTIFIER (type);
> > >        TYPE_STUB_DECL (type) = NULL;
> > 
> > Can you explain why you "free" alignment of TYPE_DECLs?  It's just some
> > bits...  does the FE somehow re-use those for sth else?  I wouldn't have
> > expected those to be set to anything meaningful.
> 
> It is set to 1 for forward declarations and 8 for fully defined types.
> Once I start to turn complete types into incomplete they would not match
> becaue of this difference.

Bah ;)

> > 
> > I'm not too comfortable with setting TREE_TYPE of a TYPE_DECL to NULL.
> > Can we instead use void_type_node?  The tree-inline.c hunk should
> > probably test whether DECL_ORIGINAL_TYPE is non-null instead.
> 
> void_type_node works too.  I wanted to put in something that will make any
> code that relies on it to crash (so I am sure there is none).
>
> Does the following variant look OK?
> I am re-testing it.

Yes.
 
Thanks,
Richard.

> 	* tree.c (free_lang_data_in_decl): Clear alignment and TREE_TYPE
> 	of TYPE_DECL.
> Index: tree.c
> ===================================================================
> --- tree.c	(revision 265522)
> +++ tree.c	(working copy)
> @@ -5354,6 +5354,10 @@ free_lang_data_in_decl (tree decl)
>        DECL_VISIBILITY_SPECIFIED (decl) = 0;
>        DECL_INITIAL (decl) = NULL_TREE;
>        DECL_ORIGINAL_TYPE (decl) = NULL_TREE;
> +      /* Make sure that complete and incomplete types have same TYPE_DECL.
> +	 C++ produces different DECL_ALIGN for them.  */
> +      SET_DECL_ALIGN (decl, 0);
> +      TREE_TYPE (decl) = void_type_node;
>      }
>    else if (TREE_CODE (decl) == FIELD_DECL)
>      DECL_INITIAL (decl) = NULL_TREE;
> 
> 

-- 
Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nuernberg)


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