From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17844 invoked by alias); 21 Dec 2014 21:01:56 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 17831 invoked by uid 89); 21 Dec 2014 21:01:55 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: rock.gnat.com Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Sun, 21 Dec 2014 21:01:54 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33EDE11639D; Sun, 21 Dec 2014 16:01:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id wqTti4wn8z9o; Sun, 21 Dec 2014 16:01:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4592A116394; Sun, 21 Dec 2014 16:01:51 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 9EE1148812; Sun, 21 Dec 2014 16:01:51 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2014 21:01:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Doug Evans Cc: Eli Zaretskii , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] symbol lookup cache Message-ID: <20141221210151.GL12884@adacore.com> References: <83d27esisa.fsf@gnu.org> <83k31mqeoa.fsf@gnu.org> <83egrtr80o.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SW-Source: 2014-12/txt/msg00603.txt.bz2 > Let's first verify the efficacy of the cache, collect some data, and > go from there. > And the next step after that, besides improving the efficiency of the > cache (*1), if the data suggests it, is I think to explore dynamically > adjusting the cache size. > And if, after that, there are still some important cases where gdb > can't do a good enough job on its own, *then* I'd be happy to add some > knobs to control the cache size. Maybe the knob we will want is not > so much to control the cache size but how it grows. do you see the amount of data in the cache being all that much? I haven't looked at your implementation, but for Ada, the cache is updated when symbols are looked up, usually due to a user querying something. So, I don't the cache to be all that big, and FWIW, we have never even had to think of having a dynamic hash size. -- Joel