From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15560 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2007 06:59:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 15544 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Nov 2007 06:59:50 -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; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 06:59:41 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.1) with ESMTP id lAQ6vcXM014295; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 01:57:38 -0500 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [10.11.255.20]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id lAQ6vbvO017188; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 01:57:37 -0500 Received: from livre.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br (vpn-14-104.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.14.104]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id lAQ6vaSd018203; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 01:57:36 -0500 Received: from livre.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by livre.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br (8.14.2/8.13.8) with ESMTP id lAQ6vZPi027459; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 04:57:35 -0200 Received: (from aoliva@localhost) by livre.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br (8.14.2/8.13.5/Submit) id lAQ6vX2U027458; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 04:57:33 -0200 To: "Richard Guenther" Cc: "Bernd Schmidt" , "Richard Kenner" , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, iant@google.com, mark@codesourcery.com, stevenb.gcc@gmail.com Subject: Re: Designs for better debug info in GCC References: <571f6b510711121208m2bf7c77fp884f52d458df118b@mail.gmail.com> <571f6b510711231556o439e7bbek9ab4855079bab51d@mail.gmail.com> <10711240545.AA22279@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> <47484BA4.5080906@t-online.de> <84fc9c000711241248q258c987ay904205559dd766c0@mail.gmail.com> <84fc9c000711241602s5d541755h158d6507de25f3f6@mail.gmail.com> From: Alexandre Oliva Errors-To: aoliva@oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 11:37:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <84fc9c000711241602s5d541755h158d6507de25f3f6@mail.gmail.com> (Richard Guenther's message of "Sun\, 25 Nov 2007 01\:02\:15 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2007-11/txt/msg00654.txt.bz2 On Nov 24, 2007, "Richard Guenther" wrote: > No, hashing is fine, but doing walks over a hashtable when your algorithm > depends on ordering is not. Point. > I have patches to fix the instance of walking over all referenced > vars. Which is in the case of UIDs using bitmaps and a walk over a > bitmap (which ensures walks in UID order). Why is such memory and CPU overhead better than avoiding the divergence of UIDs in the first place? -- Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/ Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org} Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}