From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8818 invoked by alias); 28 Sep 2004 22:51:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 8795 invoked from network); 28 Sep 2004 22:51:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 28 Sep 2004 22:51:39 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i8SMpdmG016726 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 18:51:39 -0400 Received: from zenia.home.redhat.com (sebastian-int.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.221]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i8SMpbr18870; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 18:51:38 -0400 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa/dwarf] Support for attributes pointing to a different CU References: <20040923045723.GA11871@nevyn.them.org> <20040924003412.GB10500@nevyn.them.org> From: Jim Blandy Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 22:51:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2004-09/txt/msg00465.txt.bz2 Jim Blandy writes: > I take it the reason we can't just fill in all the per_cu->psymtab > values when we build the psymtabs in the first place is that we don't > actually build the CU index until we see a CU that contains (or might > contain) inter-CU references. So we'd have to go back and record the > psymtabs we'd already created anyway. Is that right? > > We're constructing a psymtab for every CU we see; does it save much > time or space to avoid creating a twenty-byte structure as well? I > understand that this is time- and space-critical code, but if the hair > isn't a noticable win, I'd rather it not go in. And then load_full_comp_unit and process_full_comp_unit would only need to take a single argument.