From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 533 invoked by alias); 24 Jun 2009 15:31:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 524 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Jun 2009 15:31:32 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx2.redhat.com (HELO mx2.redhat.com) (66.187.237.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 24 Jun 2009 15:31:27 +0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n5OFVKXW001107; Wed, 24 Jun 2009 11:31:20 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n5OFVJo8013121; Wed, 24 Jun 2009 11:31:19 -0400 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (vpn-12-198.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.12.198]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n5OFVI00017944; Wed, 24 Jun 2009 11:31:18 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 66FD0508250; Wed, 24 Jun 2009 09:31:17 -0600 (MDT) To: "Ulrich Weigand" Cc: dje@google.com (Doug Evans), gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [10/15] Basic value access routines References: <200906151658.n5FGwrN6026829@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> From: Tom Tromey Reply-To: tromey@redhat.com Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 15:31:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <200906151658.n5FGwrN6026829@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> (Ulrich Weigand's message of "Mon\, 15 Jun 2009 18\:58\:53 +0200 \(CEST\)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (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: 2009-06/txt/msg00642.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Ulrich" == Ulrich Weigand writes: Ulrich> Those are additional minor issues; the type structures are indeed Ulrich> space critical I have been curious about this. It seems to me that in a given gdb session, most types will not actually be needed. (I haven't done the experiment though.) If that is so, then it further seems to me that types would only be space critical if we are instantiating them too eagerly. This has lead me to wonder whether lazy instantiation of types would be beneficial. A related idea that occurred to me is that, with Jan's type GC, we could detach types from objfiles and "intern" them (something like bcache-for-types). This would only be a win if there are many identical types distributed across objfiles, though. Tom