Re: 32-bit profiling counts?

[Andrew J. Schorr]

On Sun, Jun 07, 2020 at 12:18:44AM -0600, arnold@skeeve.com wrote:
> > and we'd have to review the impact of changing that type since the field
> > is used for other purposes in different contexts.
> 
> Yes, exactly.  Also the possible increase in the size of the NODE
> struct.

Unless I'm confused, this is actually in INSTRUCTION, not NODE.  On a 32-bit
platform, I think the INSTRUCTION size would likely grow by 4 bytes.

> I suspect that moving to an unsigned type would break things,
> but that moving to 64 bit long would cause less breakage. We'd
> still have to check if the values gets printed with the right
> format in all the right places.

It passes "make check" with int64_t and uint64_t, but one would certainly
want to look more closely. And yes, the print formats would need to be
adjusted.

Regards,
Andy