On 18 Oct 2019, Pedro Alves stated: > On 10/18/19 2:21 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > >>>> In most cases local types etc are a fairly small contributor to the >>>> total volume -- but macros can contribute a lot in some codebases. >>> (The >>>> Linux kernel's READ_ONCE macro is one I've personally been bitten by >>> in >>>> the past, with a new local struct in every use. GCC doesn't >>> deduplicate >>>> any of those so the resulting bloat from tens of thousands of >>> instances >>>> of this identical structure is quite incredible...) >>>> >>> >>> Sounds like something that would be beneficial to do with DWARF too. >> >> Otoh those are distinct types according to the C standard and since dwarf is >> a source level representation we should preserve this (source locations also >> differ). > > Right. Maybe some partial deduplication would be possible, preserving > type distinction. But since CTF doesn't include these, this is moot > for now.
Yeah, the libctf API and existing CTF users only care if they're assignment-compatible, which they are. We could preserve more type-identity information if there was a need to do so, but none has yet emerged. -- NULL && (void)
