On May 4, 2017 4:43:45 PM GMT+02:00, Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote:
>Hi!
>
>While type_hash_canon in case of reusing an already existing type
>ggc_frees the freshly created type, we still waste one type uid
>for each such case, this patch attempts to avoid that.
>Furthermore, for INTEGER_TYPE we keep around the min and max value
>INTEGER_CSTs and the cached values vector (until it is GCed).
>
>Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk?
>
>2017-05-04 Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com>
>
> * tree.c (next_type_uid): Change type to unsigned.
> (type_hash_canon): Decrement back next_type_uid if
> freeing a type node with the highest TYPE_UID. For INTEGER_TYPEs
> also ggc_free TYPE_MIN_VALUE, TYPE_MAX_VALUE and TYPE_CACHED_VALUES
> if possible.
>
>--- gcc/tree.c.jj 2017-05-03 16:55:39.688052581 +0200
>+++ gcc/tree.c 2017-05-03 18:49:30.662185944 +0200
>@@ -151,7 +151,7 @@ static const char * const tree_node_kind
> /* Unique id for next decl created. */
> static GTY(()) int next_decl_uid;
> /* Unique id for next type created. */
>-static GTY(()) int next_type_uid = 1;
>+static GTY(()) unsigned next_type_uid = 1;
> /* Unique id for next debug decl created. Use negative numbers,
> to catch erroneous uses. */
> static GTY(()) int next_debug_decl_uid;
>@@ -7188,6 +7188,19 @@ type_hash_canon (unsigned int hashcode,
> {
> tree t1 = ((type_hash *) *loc)->type;
> gcc_assert (TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (t1) == t1);
>+ if (TYPE_UID (type) + 1 == next_type_uid)
>+ --next_type_uid;
>+ if (TREE_CODE (type) == INTEGER_TYPE)
>+ {
>+ if (TYPE_MIN_VALUE (type)
>+ && TREE_TYPE (TYPE_MIN_VALUE (type)) == type)
>+ ggc_free (TYPE_MIN_VALUE (type));
>+ if (TYPE_MAX_VALUE (type)
>+ && TREE_TYPE (TYPE_MAX_VALUE (type)) == type)
>+ ggc_free (TYPE_MAX_VALUE (type));
>+ if (TYPE_CACHED_VALUES_P (type))
>+ ggc_free (TYPE_CACHED_VALUES (type));
>+ }
> free_node (type);
Shouldn't free_node handle this? That said, is freeing min/max safe? The
constants are shared after all.
Richard.
> return t1;
> }
>
> Jakub
