From: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
To: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [patch] Support DW_OP_call2 and DW_OP_call4 (PR 10640)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 20:43:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m3aazwqr6v.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090920123647.GA30021@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> (Jan Kratochvil's message of "Sun, 20 Sep 2009 14:36:47 +0200")
>>>>> "Jan" == Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com> writes:
Jan> as GCC discusses its use in PR41343 the patch implements it for GDB.
Thanks.
Jan> It has some new overhead due to symbol_hash for all symbol DIEs.
Jan> Did not measure it but I am not aware much how it could be avoided
Jan> as GDB does not parse the DWARF blocks while reading them in.
Yeah, I could not think of a way to avoid it either. I think parsing
the DWARF while reading would be worse than what you have now, because
(IIUC) it would negatively impact performance.
I thought of one way to reduce the overhead a bit, but it is fairly
gross. We could have dwarf2read.c make symbols like:
struct dwarf_symbol
{
struct symbol base;
int offset;
};
Then, where it matters, "downcast" from symbol to dwarf_symbol and find
the offset. symbol_hash would just directly hold dwarf_symbols, no need
for struct dwarf2_offset_and_symbol.
This would save a pointer per symbol.
That said, I probably would not bother with this until we know that
space is an issue. I know that symtab.h claims that symbol size is a
problem, but I am not sure that this is really true -- I suspect it is
only the case with -readnow, which most people don't use.
The ugliness here is that it assumes that no other part of gdb cares
about the size of a symbol. This is probably true but also a fragile
assumption.
Jan> 2009-09-20 Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
Jan> Fix PR 10640.
[...]
Ok.
Tom
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-12 20:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-09-20 12:37 Jan Kratochvil
2009-10-12 20:43 ` Tom Tromey [this message]
2009-10-12 20:49 ` Tom Tromey
2010-06-07 11:56 ` [patch 0/2] DW_OP_call: " Jan Kratochvil
2010-06-07 11:56 ` [patch 2/2] DW_OP_call: Support DW_OP_call2 and DW_OP_call4 Jan Kratochvil
2010-06-07 18:13 ` Tom Tromey
2010-06-07 20:00 ` Jan Kratochvil
2010-06-07 11:56 ` [patch 1/2] DW_OP_call: Provide per_cu in the batons Jan Kratochvil
2010-06-07 17:44 ` Tom Tromey
2010-06-07 19:44 ` Jan Kratochvil
2009-10-12 21:08 ` [patch] Support DW_OP_call2 and DW_OP_call4 (PR 10640) Daniel Jacobowitz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m3aazwqr6v.fsf@fleche.redhat.com \
--to=tromey@redhat.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=jan.kratochvil@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox