Anastasia added inline comments. ================ Comment at: test/Headers/opencl-c-header.cl:53-54 @@ +52,4 @@ +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple spir-unknown-unknown -emit-llvm -o - -finclude-default-header -fmodules -fimplicit-module-maps -fmodules-cache-path=%t -fdisable-module-hash -ftime-report %s 2>&1 | FileCheck --check-prefix=CHECK --check-prefix=CHECK-MOD %s +// RUN: chmod u+w %t/opencl_c.pcm +// RUN: mv %t/opencl_c.pcm %t/1_0.pcm + ---------------- yaxunl wrote: > I checked the size of the pch file. The largest chunk is for function > declarations. Since it contains about 30k declarations, each one is about 50 > bytes on average, so total size is about 1.6MB. > > The AST of function decl is written by ASTDeclWriter::VisitFunctionDecl > http://clang.llvm.org/doxygen/ASTWriterDecl_8cpp_source.html > > A code snippet is as follows: > > 515 Record.push_back((int)D->SClass); // FIXME: stable encoding > 516 Record.push_back(D->IsInline); > 517 Record.push_back(D->IsInlineSpecified); > 518 Record.push_back(D->IsVirtualAsWritten); > 519 Record.push_back(D->IsPure); > 520 Record.push_back(D->HasInheritedPrototype); > 521 Record.push_back(D->HasWrittenPrototype); > 522 Record.push_back(D->IsDeleted); > 523 Record.push_back(D->IsTrivial); > 524 Record.push_back(D->IsDefaulted); > 525 Record.push_back(D->IsExplicitlyDefaulted); > 526 Record.push_back(D->HasImplicitReturnZero); > 527 Record.push_back(D->IsConstexpr); > 528 Record.push_back(D->HasSkippedBody); > 529 Record.push_back(D->IsLateTemplateParsed); > 530 Record.push_back(D->getLinkageInternal()); > 531 Record.AddSourceLocation(D->getLocEnd()); > > Record is like a buffer which will be written to file. It uses a vector of > int64 to store the values, so it takes space. It feels the problem is that it has to record all the attributes even though most of them are missing. Quite wasteful! Wondering if variable length solution would be possible...
================ Comment at: test/Headers/opencl-c-header.cl:70 @@ +69,3 @@ +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple spir-unknown-unknown -emit-llvm -o - -finclude-default-header -fmodules -fimplicit-module-maps -fmodules-cache-path=%t %s | FileCheck %s +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple spir-unknown-unknown -emit-llvm -o - -cl-std=CL2.0 -finclude-default-header -fmodules -fimplicit-module-maps -fmodules-cache-path=%t %s | FileCheck --check-prefix=CHECK20 %s +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple amdgcn--amdhsa -emit-llvm -o - -cl-std=CL2.0 -finclude-default-header -fmodules -fimplicit-module-maps -fmodules-cache-path=%t %s | FileCheck --check-prefix=CHECK20 %s ---------------- yaxunl wrote: > Anastasia wrote: > > yaxunl wrote: > > > I added check to the second compilation to make sure module is read, also > > > changed the modules to be read only so that they won't be created again. > > Ok, now I see what you are testing here. :) > > > > Do you think we could add: > > CHECK-NOT: Reading modules > > > > For the cases the modules are regenerated new? > In the case the modules are generated as new, Clang will generate the module > first and then load it. So in the time report, you still see 'Reading > modules'. In this case, should you be testing it in regenerated mode too? Also would it make sense to add: CHECK-NOT: _Z3ctzc to make sure there isn't OpenCL 2.0 functionality. http://reviews.llvm.org/D20444 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
