From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <libc-hacker-return-5176-listarch-libc-hacker=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 30845 invoked by alias); 30 Apr 2002 15:32:02 -0000
Mailing-List: contact libc-hacker-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:libc-hacker-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/libc-hacker/>
List-Post: <mailto:libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:libc-hacker-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: libc-hacker-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 30788 invoked from network); 30 Apr 2002 15:31:56 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO sunsite.mff.cuni.cz) (195.113.19.66)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 30 Apr 2002 15:31:56 -0000
Received: (from jakub@localhost)
	by sunsite.mff.cuni.cz (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g3UFVfB02350;
	Tue, 30 Apr 2002 17:31:41 +0200
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 08:32:00 -0000
From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
To: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com>
Cc: Glibc hackers <libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com>
Subject: [PATCH] locarchive.c nested macros
Message-ID: <20020430173141.T32482@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz>
Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i
X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg00078.txt.bz2

Hi!

I have only 256MB of RAM on my workstation and compiling
locarchive.c takes lots of memory at least with gcc 2.96-RH
(230MB before I killed it), with gcc 3.1 it is slightly better (~ 100MB)
but anyway building glibc with -j3 is problematic then.
The thing is that stpcpy is extremely huge macro (we need to do something
for gcc 3.2, so that stpcpy is properly optimized by the compiler and
we don't have to do all this), and nesting it 5 times means the resulting
preprocessed source is ~6MB and the early compiler passes are fed lots of
data till most of it is optimized away. After following patch, locarchive.i
is ~ 730KB and compiling it eats way less memory.
At least with gcc-3.1, the generated code is identical.

2002-04-30  Jakub Jelinek  <jakub@redhat.com>

	* locale/programs/locarchive.c (add_locales_to_archive): Don't nest
	too many stpcpy macros.

--- libc/locale/programs/locarchive.c.jj	Thu Apr 18 09:55:47 2002
+++ libc/locale/programs/locarchive.c	Tue Apr 30 17:34:05 2002
@@ -711,11 +711,8 @@ add_locales_to_archive (nlist, list, rep
 			     directory and it therefore must contain a
 			     regular file with the same name except a
 			     "SYS_" prefix.  */
-			  strcpy (stpcpy (stpcpy (stpcpy (stpcpy (fullname,
-								  fname),
-							  "/"),
-						  d->d_name),
-					  "/SYS_"),
+			  char *t = stpcpy (stpcpy (fullname, fname), "/");
+			  strcpy (stpcpy (stpcpy (t, d->d_name), "/SYS_"),
 				  d->d_name);
 
 			  if (stat64 (fullname, &st) == -1)
@@ -765,11 +762,10 @@ add_locales_to_archive (nlist, list, rep
 
 	    if (S_ISDIR (st.st_mode))
 	      {
+		char *t;
 		close (fd);
-		strcpy (stpcpy (stpcpy (stpcpy (stpcpy (fullname, fname),
-						"/"),
-					locnames[cnt]),
-				"/SYS_"),
+		t = stpcpy (stpcpy (fullname, fname), "/");
+		strcpy (stpcpy (stpcpy (t, locnames[cnt]), "/SYS_"),
 			locnames[cnt]);
 
 		fd = open64 (fullname, O_RDONLY);

	Jakub