From: Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>
To: Steven Bosscher <stevenb.gcc@gmail.com>
Cc: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>,
Mike Stump <mikestump@comcast.net>,
Laurynas Biveinis <laurynas.biveinis@gmail.com>,
gcc-patches Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [gc-improv] Permanent vs function RTL obstack fix
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 15:02:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DA46985.3040405@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinrxQ61-8dDhUV-FE40U9VD3npR1g@mail.gmail.com>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 04/12/11 02:45, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 08:33:56AM +0200, Steven Bosscher wrote:
>>> I think all these comments from you "old guys" ;-) are more
>>> discouraging than fair. What Laurynas and Bernd have done, is nothing
>>
>> It is IMHO completely fair to point that the risks this brings in
>> a huge maintainance nightmare are very high.
>
> And IM-equally-HO it is completely unfair to talk about risks in any
> situation where there is nothing yet to talk about! Give it a chance
> and wait for something that's more than just an idea, and then assess
> the risks based on an implementation.
Given that we've already got a goodly amount of experience with obstack
and GC based mechanisms for allocation, I think it is completely fair
and wise to discuss the known risk/reward for both.
>
> Or just say "this won't fly" now so that people who would like to work
> on this can turn their attention to something else. Also fine. Really.
I have serious concerns about reverting to obstacks as our main memory
allocation approach for tree & rtl data. However, I also realize that
there are objects where obstacks make sense and I realize some of those
objects may currently be hanging off tree or RTL structures.
With that in mind, I'm all for a critical examination of our data
structures, their lifetimes and what allocation model works best. From
that I would expect that we'll find some cases where an obstack model
works better and the structures will move to that model.
jeff
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJNpGmEAAoJEBRtltQi2kC7cjUIALtwCRbcsxABIx6xtWlZIHRy
vPfB8pc6u+IhIrbu/T2qZjUoP6bq5UQIgCPIy3o7qSgJ5Qd8NvYJQ5nMHMyPZvX2
MDzyTJcMB1OUsoZhgVwTdZoL1aSp3ARopruDM2DNc9zo8DXP5YFcn2w6bXaASjr5
jENRoiqTe6hLgJXQZT7QQObusR6gM4Off78Hs/vGlaOmeXMSONfMTxms1ya0ROQe
h+YyXpQuLsUDdIO9wSHfeD0/73er8fLYqlcJ77GPUDK907oVtr4bKUWOirwX9QL2
vRwMur93cVjPvHuNUPZdNxsrpozJH+G/iAIPJVa3K+AYXBvvzWtSpDHb4ttvy48=
=pN2J
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-12 15:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-07 6:17 Laurynas Biveinis
2011-04-07 21:33 ` Steven Bosscher
2011-04-08 13:22 ` Laurynas Biveinis
2011-04-08 14:36 ` Jeff Law
2011-04-08 14:39 ` Richard Guenther
2011-04-08 14:42 ` Jeff Law
2011-04-09 10:34 ` Steven Bosscher
2011-04-10 18:27 ` Laurynas Biveinis
2011-04-10 18:49 ` Basile Starynkevitch
2011-04-11 20:03 ` Jeff Law
2011-04-12 0:22 ` Mike Stump
2011-04-12 2:54 ` Jeff Law
2011-04-12 6:34 ` Steven Bosscher
2011-04-12 7:01 ` Jakub Jelinek
2011-04-12 8:45 ` Steven Bosscher
2011-04-12 10:44 ` Mike Stump
2011-04-12 10:49 ` Steven Bosscher
2011-04-12 15:02 ` Jeff Law [this message]
2011-04-12 11:56 ` Bernd Schmidt
2011-04-12 15:31 ` Jeff Law
2011-04-10 18:23 ` Laurynas Biveinis
2011-04-10 22:33 ` Steven Bosscher
2011-04-11 20:08 ` Jeff Law
2011-04-12 11:43 ` Laurynas Biveinis
2011-04-12 11:46 ` Laurynas Biveinis
2011-04-12 17:25 ` Mike Stump
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=4DA46985.3040405@redhat.com \
--to=law@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=laurynas.biveinis@gmail.com \
--cc=mikestump@comcast.net \
--cc=stevenb.gcc@gmail.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;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).