On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 12:10 AM, Dave Martin <dave.mar...@linaro.org> wrote: > Defining a macro seems to eat up about half a megabyte of memory, > due to the excessively large size of the macro arguments hash table > (large enough for 65537 entries by default).
Hi Dave. Just bikshedding responses from me, but that's better than nothing. > As a result, gas memory consumption becomes rather huge when a > modestly large number (hundreds) of macros are defined. > > In fact, it appears to make little sense to force the size of macro > argument hash tables to be the same as the size of other hash > tables, since the typical number of macro arguments is very small > compared with the number of opcodes, macros or symbols; and because > the number of macros is not limited to a small constant number. > > This patch uses a smaller default size for the macro argument hash > tables (43) which should be enough for virtually everyone. > hash_new_sized () is exported from hash.c in order to allow hash > tables of multiple sizes to be created. What's the most arguments you've seen in real code? Does recursion or nesting of macros ever blow out this number? > A new argument, --macro-args is added to allow this number to be > customised. I don't like this. The default should be high enough that no one ever needs the argument. > These numbers are deliberately conservative -- they could perhaps > be reduced further. > > Caveats: > > * I'm not a hash table expert, so the exact size values I've > chosen may not be optimal. Does it matter? Is the hash table checked often, or is it just used as a convenient name/value container? _______________________________________________ linaro-toolchain mailing list linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-toolchain
