shchenz added a comment. In D115503#3199459 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D115503#3199459>, @Esme wrote:
> In D115503#3195171 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D115503#3195171>, @dblaikie > wrote: > >> Ah, cool - could you include % growth on those rows > > Thanks, I edited the table in the previous comment. > >> (hmm, .debug_line and .debug_str shouldn't be changing in size with this >> change, right? If you use the same clang version to test the two cases (if >> you're using a bootstrap with/without the patch applied, then the patch >> changes itself would show up as changes here)) > > Hmm...it's a little strange. I got these data by: > > 1. pull a base llvm-project branch --> source codes > 2. build the source --> clang1 > 3. build the codes after applying the patch --> clang2 > 4. use clang1 to build the source (no patch) --> clang-before > 5. use clang2 to build the source (no patch) --> clang-after > 6. compare the size between clang-before and clang-after > > I reproduced these steps on another base branch, and saw similar changes > (i.e. .debug_line and .debug_str changed in size)... > But I think the change is so small as to be negligible? > >> & if you could include this table in the commit message, that'd be great! >> >> (can you commit this yourself, or do you need someone to do that for you?) > > I will include this table when committing, thanks! `.debug_str` will be changed because of `DW_AT_producer`? We are using different compilers to compile the source. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D115503/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D115503 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
