[patch] update function comments for lto_symtab_encoder_encode_*

[Richard Biener]

On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 5:35 PM, Aldy Hernandez <aldyh@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi Richard.
>
> I'm chasing my tail here looking at an LTO + debug problem, and for the life
> of me I can't figure out how all this partition business affects a symbol's
> `analyzed' bit.  Anyways... the documentation for all these functions is
> wrong.
>
> Can you look at this patch and tell me if it makes sense?  I feel a bit
> uneasy committing under the obvious rule, since I don't entirely understand
> the partitioning thing.
>
> Would anyone mind me fixing this on mainline?  It's just a comment fix.

Yeah, it's ok for trunk.

> Also, since you seem to understand all this best, can you suggest some
> better wording for the lto_encoder_entry comments?
>
> /* Entry of LTO symtab encoder.  */
> struct lto_encoder_entry
> {
>   symtab_node *node;
>   /* Is the node in this partition (i.e. ltrans of this partition will
>      be responsible for outputting it)? */
>   unsigned int in_partition:1;
>   /* Do we encode body in this partition?  */
>   unsigned int body:1;
>   /* Do we encode initializer in this partition?
>      For example the readonly variable initializers are encoded to aid
>      constant folding even if they are not in the partition.  */
>   unsigned int initializer:1;
> };
>
> Whenever I get to the LTO part of this project, I promise to start
> documenting things better.  This whole thing is a mystery.

Well - mostly to me as well ;)  I'll let Honza answer this...

Thanks,
Richard.

> Thanks.
> Aldy