https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94230
--- Comment #7 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to David Malcolm from comment #6) > If you have a huge workload, one possible workaround would be to disable > range tracking, perhaps tweaking line_table->default_range_bits, which would > give you a bit more "headroom". IIRC we don't currently expose a way to do > this, and probably some extra code would be needed. It's currently > hardcoded to 5. > > Perhaps some kind of -fno-location-ranges? It could either: > (a) don't attempt to store location ranges (would probably have to disable > e.g. fix-it hints) > (b) set line_table->default_range_bits to 0, so that all ranges have to go > to the ad-hoc table, but buying space for more locations. I have tried the above (2) to set the line_table->default_range_bits to 0. and used this GCC to compile our huge application with -Wmisleading-indent, this time, the compiler works without the warning. and there are also some proper misleading-indent warning were emitted. So, I'd like to add one new gcc option -fno-location-range, whose implementation is to set line_table->default_range_bits to 0 to save more space for column tracking. Is this good to go?
