From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4910 invoked by alias); 28 Mar 2011 18:41:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 4898 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Mar 2011 18:41:58 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 28 Mar 2011 18:41:49 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p2SIfnJp031487 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Mon, 28 Mar 2011 14:41:49 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p2SIfm72031544; Mon, 28 Mar 2011 14:41:49 -0400 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p2SIfmMR032731; Mon, 28 Mar 2011 14:41:48 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 12DDF378BE8; Mon, 28 Mar 2011 12:41:48 -0600 (MDT) From: Tom Tromey To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch 5/7] STT_GNU_IFUNC symbols reader References: <20110319211628.GF30867@host1.jankratochvil.net> <20110328125910.GA20141@host1.jankratochvil.net> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 19:52:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20110328125910.GA20141@host1.jankratochvil.net> (Jan Kratochvil's message of "Mon, 28 Mar 2011 14:59:10 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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 X-SW-Source: 2011-03/txt/msg01136.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Jan" == Jan Kratochvil writes: Jan> Did you mean that GDB should make the hash size its maximum Jan> possible one, by counting the STT_GNU_IFUNC symbols in that Jan> objfile? Nope, I was referring to allocating the hash on an obstack. Jan> BTW the rehashing using non-deallocating hashtab_obstack_allocate Jan> already commonly happens in current FSF GDB code. Yeah, but I don't like that. It isn't a big issue if you want to keep it as-is. Tom