This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Patch for n32/n64 structure returns
On Sat, 13 Sep 2003, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Here's a patch to the install & release notes. In mips-abi.html, parts
> A-D are already committed. Parts E and F are implemented by the structure
> return patch.
These patches look fine as well, thanks!
Please find below some minor comments (but this is nice stuff, for sure).
Gerald
Index: gcc-3.4/changes.html
===================================================================
! <li>The code generated for certain MIPS targets
! <a href="mips-abi.html">will not be binary compatible</a>
! with earlier releases.</li>
How about keeping this sentence (w/o the link) and appending
"semicolon the <a href="mips-abi.html">ABI implemented by GCC
has changed</a>"
or adding the word "ABI" in some different way?
! <li>Several <a href="mips-abi.html">ABI bugs</a> in the MIPS port
Extend the link to include "in the MIPS port" as well?
--- gcc-3.4/mips-abi.html Sat Sep 13 10:15:25 2003
+ <p>GCC 3.4 fixes several cases in which earlier releases would not
+ follow the MIPS calling conventions. This document describes
+ each fix and the kind of code that would be affected by it.
Would omitting "that would be" and "by it" work?
Also, would you mind adding a <h1> with the same contents as <title>?
+ <h3>A. Small aggregate arguments (1)</h3>
There is no <h2> on that page, and we must not use <h(n+1)> if <h(n)>
is not present.
+ <td><ul>
+ <li>an aggregate argument is passed in a register; and</li>
+ <li>that argument is smaller than 4 bytes.</li>
+ </ul></td>
Here (and also later, in general for the "Condition" column), should the
sentence start with an uppercase letter ("An" instead of "an")?
+ <tr valign="top">
+ <th align="right">Old behavior</th>
+ <td>The register would be padded at the least significant end.</td>
+ </tr>
Would "was" also work instead of "would" here? (Note that I'm not a native
speaker!)
+ <p>It would take 9 registers to hold <code>x</code>, but
+ only 8 argument registers are available. Since <code>x</code>'s
+ size is not a multiple of 8, previous releases would pass it by
+ reference (that is, they would pass a pointer to <code>x</code>
+ in <code>$4</code>).</p>
"passed" instead of "would pass" (twice)?
+ <td>o32, o64, n32 and n64</th>
^^^
Perhaps a comma here?
Gerald