Re: [patch] timevar TLC

2012-08-15 Thread Richard Guenther
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 10:45 PM, Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote: On 12-08-14 16:39 , Steven Bosscher wrote: I seriously doubt that ;-) Anyway, it's not so simple, this 80-len(everything else). I was looking for a solution like that but it can't be done: there is no everything

Re: [patch] timevar TLC

2012-08-15 Thread Steven Bosscher
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 10:46 PM, Lawrence Crowl cr...@googlers.com wrote: You can check the error statically. Something like % cat limitstring.c #define LIMIT 32 struct def { int x; char name[LIMIT+1]; }; struct def var[] = { { 3, hello }, { 4, name is much too too long for

[patch] timevar TLC

2012-08-14 Thread Steven Bosscher
Hello, Many unused timevars, many timevars that measure completely different passes, passes with the wrong timevar, etc. Time for a bit of maintenance / janitorial. Bootstrappedtested on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu. OK for trunk? Ciao! Steven timevar_tlc.diff Description: Binary data

Re: [patch] timevar TLC

2012-08-14 Thread Diego Novillo
On 12-08-14 14:26 , Steven Bosscher wrote: Hello, Many unused timevars, many timevars that measure completely different passes, passes with the wrong timevar, etc. Time for a bit of maintenance / janitorial. Bootstrappedtested on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu. OK for trunk? Ciao! Steven

Re: [patch] timevar TLC

2012-08-14 Thread Steven Bosscher
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 8:40 PM, Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote: On 12-08-14 14:26 , Steven Bosscher wrote: Hello, Many unused timevars, many timevars that measure completely different passes, passes with the wrong timevar, etc. Time for a bit of maintenance / janitorial.

Re: [patch] timevar TLC

2012-08-14 Thread Diego Novillo
On 12-08-14 15:06 , Steven Bosscher wrote: On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 8:40 PM, Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote: On 12-08-14 14:26 , Steven Bosscher wrote: @@ -505,6 +507,16 @@ timevar_print (FILE *fp) TIMEVAR. */ start_time = now; +#ifdef ENABLE_CHECKING + /* Pester those

Re: [patch] timevar TLC

2012-08-14 Thread Steven Bosscher
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 9:17 PM, Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote: Is 32 the longest we can tolerate? This 32 is just currently the longest name length of all timevars (for straight-line strength reduction), but there are a few more long ones (PCH preprocessor state restore ...). I didn't

Re: [patch] timevar TLC

2012-08-14 Thread Diego Novillo
On 12-08-14 15:20 , Steven Bosscher wrote: On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 9:17 PM, Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote: Is 32 the longest we can tolerate? This 32 is just currently the longest name length of all timevars (for straight-line strength reduction), but there are a few more long ones

Re: [patch] timevar TLC

2012-08-14 Thread Steven Bosscher
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 9:25 PM, Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote: This 32 is just currently the longest name length of all timevars (for straight-line strength reduction), but there are a few more long ones (PCH preprocessor state restore ...). I didn't look at the total length of the

Re: [patch] timevar TLC

2012-08-14 Thread Diego Novillo
On 12-08-14 16:39 , Steven Bosscher wrote: I seriously doubt that ;-) Anyway, it's not so simple, this 80-len(everything else). I was looking for a solution like that but it can't be done: there is no everything else. It depends on the configuration -- more specifically on HAVE_USER_TIME,

Re: [patch] timevar TLC

2012-08-14 Thread Lawrence Crowl
On 8/14/12, Steven Bosscher stevenb@gmail.com wrote: On Aug 14, 2012 Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote: On 12-08-14 14:26 , Steven Bosscher wrote: Many unused timevars, many timevars that measure completely different passes, passes with the wrong timevar, etc. Time for a