Hi, Thank you very much for your quick check and reply.
Kugan Vivekanandarajah <kugan.vivekanandara...@linaro.org> writes: > > I looked into the structure, adding this field is not going to make the s= > tructure bigger for either ILP32 or LP64 targets. If you want, you use bit= > -fields; there is one bool already there which means you can fit 8 bits in = > the same area as currently taken up by that one. > Yes. I should have checked the mem_attrs structure. This does have at > least a byte left unlike some other tightly packed structures (gimple > and some tree structures in gcc). Even though memory usage does not increase, I understand the policy of wanting to make the data structure simple. Another way to implement this feature is to use the `addrspace' field in `struct mem_attrs' without adding any fields. I think that this implementation may be more decent. However, since this field holds information specific to the target machine, changing this will affect many files. > >> Alternatively, we maybe able to get this info from dwarf info when we co= mpile with -g ? > > > > I doubt you can. He wants to know if an instruction is a spill location.= > The location of a variable might be recorded in -g (if it was an user var= > iable) but not that does present the data for all temps being spilled. > > > > I think the patch is actually a good one in general just needs some clean= > up. I was not thinking about implementation using DWARF. About 2013, I have created a tool to extract information from DWARF data in binary files generated by GCC. At that time, there were some shortages in the DWARF information, and as a result, it did not go very well. Best regards, -- -------------------------------------- Masaki Arai _______________________________________________ linaro-toolchain mailing list linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-toolchain
