This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [patch]: PR/36180
- From: Kai Tietz <Kai dot Tietz at onevision dot com>
- To: "Richard Guenther" <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- Cc: "Dominique Dhumieres" <dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, "Graham Stott" <graham dot stott at btinternet dot com>
- Date: Thu, 8 May 2008 15:37:47 +0200
- Subject: Re: [patch]: PR/36180
"Richard Guenther" <richard.guenther@gmail.com> wrote on 08.05.2008
15:24:40:
> On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 3:14 PM, Graham Stott
> <graham.stott@btinternet.com> wrote:
> > Richard,
> >
> > I think the 2nd part of the patch is wrong in the sense that we
> don't protect
> > any of the other TARGET_FOO macros in target-def.h this way.
> >
> > I think the correct solution is to remove the
> TARGET_RETURN_IN_MEMORY define
> > from i386.h and add it to i386.c to override the default in the
> same way for
> > all the other overriden TARGET_FOO macros.
>
> Kai, would you please fix this as suggested?
>
> Thanks,
> Richard.
>
Ok, I will introduce in for subtargets the define
SUBTARGET_RETURN_IN_MEMORY and define the TARGET_RETURN_IN_MEMORY just in
i386.c file. Should we make the ix86_return_in_memory functions in i386.c
static and remove them from i386-protos.h?
Cheers,
Kai
| (\_/) This is Bunny. Copy and paste Bunny
| (='.'=) into your signature to help him gain
| (")_(") world domination.