Hi,
Thank you very much for your quick check and reply.
Kugan Vivekanandarajah kugan.vivekanandarajah@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