From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3FE1E385B834 for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 13:34:45 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 3FE1E385B834 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=simark.ca Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=simark@simark.ca Received: from [10.0.0.11] (unknown [192.222.164.54]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 34A551E5F9; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 09:34:43 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/22] More splitting of dwarf2/read.c To: Tom Tromey , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20200322184523.28959-1-tom@tromey.com> From: Simon Marchi Message-ID: <608fac8e-9c3a-315c-d5db-ca69bea260f1@simark.ca> Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2020 09:34:42 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200322184523.28959-1-tom@tromey.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US-large Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2020 13:34:46 -0000 On 2020-03-22 2:45 p.m., Tom Tromey wrote: > One goal of mine is to split up the DWARF reader code into many > smaller, more self-contained files. I think this will make the code > easier to read and to work on; and also let us tease out (and repair) > hidden dependencies. This latter part is desirable because, in the > longer run, I'd like to parallelize DWARF reading. > > So, here is round 2 of splitting. > > The main change here is that the macro-reading code is moved to its > own file. It's almost possible, after this, to scan macros in a > worker thread. (However, dwz file handling, and the recent move to > sharing a bcache, interfere with this.) > > Some smaller utility functions are also moved into other files as > well. > > Let me know what you think, > Tom > > Other than the little nits I pointed out, this all looks good to me, thanks for doing this! Simon