sammccall added a comment.

Sorry to be late to the party, just some efficiency concerns



================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/IncludeCleaner.cpp:133
+    // Check if Loc is not written in a physical file.
+    if (FID.isInvalid() || SM.isWrittenInBuiltinFile(Loc) ||
+        SM.isWrittenInCommandLineFile(Loc))
----------------
This part of the function is a hot path: we haven't deduplicated FileIDs yet. 
And isWrittenInBulitinFile/CommandLineFile are not cheap (seriously, go look at 
the implementation of getPresumedLoc. I'm not sure *why* we need to handle the 
'presumed' cases there, either).

I think the simple/good thing is to allow this to hit Files.insert(FID) and 
then filter those out later instead.

This could be in a simple walk over the DenseSet at the end, but 
translateToHeaderIDs is actually looking at the FileEntries for each header 
anyway. My guess is we're crashing in this code:

```
    const FileEntry *FE = SM.getFileEntryForID(FID);
    assert(FE); // this assert passes, we get a fake FE for "<built in>", 
"<command line>" or "<scratch>"
    // Option 1: we could bail out here with a simple check on FE->getName().
    const auto File = Includes.getID(FE);
    assert(File); // this assert fails. Option 2: turn this assert into an if 
instead. 
```


================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/IncludeCleaner.cpp:148
     // ScratchBuffer). That is not a real file we can include.
     if (!SM.isWrittenInScratchSpace(Exp.getSpellingLoc()))
       add(Exp.getSpellingLoc());
----------------
FWIW, the same seems to apply here (though at least we've deduplicated file 
IDs).

I don't think we need to do the expensive check to avoid adding scratch buffers 
to the list, when we can just filter them out at the end with a cheaper check.
(In any case I don't think it makes much sense to check for scratch *before* 
calling add(), but check for builtin/cli *inside* add()).


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D112608/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D112608

_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to