On Tue, Apr 28, 2026 at 5:23 PM Josh Poimboeuf <[email protected]> wrote: [...] > > Also a few nitpicks below. > > > > > Signed-off-by: Josh Poimboeuf <[email protected]> > > > --- > > [...] > > > +static struct symbol *find_twin(struct elfs *e, struct symbol *sym1) > > > +{ > > > + struct symbol *name_last = NULL, *scope_last = NULL, > > > + *file_last = NULL, *csum_last = NULL; > > > + unsigned int name_orig = 0, name_patched = 0; > > > + unsigned int scope_orig = 0, scope_patched = 0; > > > + unsigned int file_orig = 0, file_patched = 0; > > > + unsigned int csum_orig = 0, csum_patched = 0; > > > + struct symbol *sym2, *match = NULL; > > > + > > > + /* Count orig candidates */ > > > + for_each_sym_by_demangled_name(e->orig, sym1->demangled_name, > > > sym2) { > > > + if (sym2->twin || sym1->type != sym2->type || > > > dont_correlate(sym2) || > > > + (!maybe_same_file(sym1, sym2))) > > > continue; > > > > > > - count++; > > > - result = sym2; > > > + /* Level 1: name match (widest filter) */ > > > + name_orig++; > > > + > > > + /* Level 2: scope (scope changes allowed) */ > > > + if (is_tu_local_sym(sym1) != is_tu_local_sym(sym2)) > > > > is_tu_local_sym(sym1) is called many times, shall we add a variable > > for it? > > Unless it's actually a performance issue I'd prefer not to add yet > another bit to struct symbol.
We don't need to add it to struct symbol, a local variable for sym1 will be good. No need for sym2. IOW, we have something like bool sym1_is_local = is_tu_local_sym(sym1); ... if (sym1_is_local != is_tu_local_sym(sym2)) ... Thanks, Song
