From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7150 invoked by alias); 15 Feb 2006 13:48:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 7123 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Feb 2006 13:48:01 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 15 Feb 2006 13:47:58 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k1FDkrHJ030231; Wed, 15 Feb 2006 08:46:53 -0500 Received: from pobox.toronto.redhat.com (pobox.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.4]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id k1FDkq106429; Wed, 15 Feb 2006 08:46:52 -0500 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (sebastian-int.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.221]) by pobox.toronto.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k1FDkp93010430; Wed, 15 Feb 2006 08:46:51 -0500 Message-ID: <43F330CE.7020700@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 13:48:00 -0000 From: Diego Novillo User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20051201) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Aldy Hernandez CC: Mark Mitchell , Richard Henderson , gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: pruning unused debugging types (enums/PR23336) References: <20051117220835.GA8907@redhat.com> <20051117230925.GB21279@redhat.com> <437D7395.8080000@codesourcery.com> <43F13C3B.7050008@codesourcery.com> <20060214115052.GA29895@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20060214115052.GA29895@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2006-02/txt/msg00253.txt.bz2 Aldy Hernandez wrote: >> You could combine the two ideas: a global hash table of types used in >> casts, where each entry had a list of functions using those types. That >> should take up no more storage than the per-function vectors. Then, >> you'd have to walk the entire hash table, writing out each type for >> which at least one of the associated functions was written out, >> including being inlined into another function. > > Do we keep a hash of functions that have been written out somewhere? > You need a list of functions that have been written or scheduled to be emitted? Each node in the call graph has a field 'output' set to true when the function is marked for generation.