Re: compressed pointer type implementation in gcc

2008-07-25 Thread Yair Lifshitz
Thanks for the help everyone. I would like to begin working on this (== supporting this natively in the compiler with a keyword/modifier (not sure about the correct term :))). What steps do I need to take before beginning in order to ensure this effort will go into the main branch once it's comple

Re: compressed pointer type implementation in gcc

2008-07-20 Thread Andi Kleen
"Yair Lifshitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On a different note, it is actually hard to decide which pointers can > be compressed at the compilation level (without user intervention) > seeing as some pointers are actually <8-byte aligned (i.e. char-s) and > forward declarations can make it impo

Re: compressed pointer type implementation in gcc

2008-07-20 Thread Yair Lifshitz
On 7/20/08, Joe Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 06:53:41PM -0400, Robert Dewar wrote: > > Andi Kleen wrote: > > Well the idea would be specifically for applications that can live > > in 32 GB. If you compile in this mode, obviously you can't play > > this trick, and you h

Re: compressed pointer type implementation in gcc

2008-07-19 Thread Joe Buck
On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 06:53:41PM -0400, Robert Dewar wrote: > Andi Kleen wrote: > >"Yair Lifshitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>Basically, as long as the application is in the 32G range (2^32*2^3), > > > >Seems like a strange assumption. If the application can use 32GB > >what stops it from us

Re: compressed pointer type implementation in gcc

2008-07-19 Thread Robert Dewar
Andi Kleen wrote: "Yair Lifshitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Basically, as long as the application is in the 32G range (2^32*2^3), Seems like a strange assumption. If the application can use 32GB what stops it from using 40GB or 64GB? Systems with that much memory are readily available these

Re: compressed pointer type implementation in gcc

2008-07-19 Thread Andi Kleen
"Yair Lifshitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Basically, as long as the application is in the 32G range (2^32*2^3), Seems like a strange assumption. If the application can use 32GB what stops it from using 40GB or 64GB? Systems with that much memory are readily available these days. > Would be

Re: compressed pointer type implementation in gcc

2008-07-19 Thread Yair Lifshitz
The application does go well beyond the 4GB range. By using this implementation I can use 32-bit pointers for most objects (those that do not require <8byte alignment, i.e. chars, etc.) while still have a 32GB address range. On 7/19/08, Robert Dewar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yair Lifshitz wrot

Re: compressed pointer type implementation in gcc

2008-07-19 Thread Robert Dewar
Yair Lifshitz wrote: Hi, I hope I'm not flooding with this topic. I've did some research and couldn't find anything relevant on this topic. My team is developing a large scale CAD application that has a large memory footprint, requiring strong machines to run. The application uses pointers mass