This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] fix arm neon ICE by widening tree_type's precision field
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Richard
Guenther<richard.guenther@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 10:54 AM, Nathan Froyd<froydnj@codesourcery.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 08:36:27AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> Any? ?What I mean is, instead of moving packed_flag from type to
>>> type.common.base.packed_flag, you move lang_flag_6 from type to
>>> type.common.base.lang_flag_7. ?Instead of having 7 language fields in
>>> base and 7 in type, you have 8 and 6 respectively.
>>>
>>> Actually, what about moving all 7 language specific fields to base? ;-)
>>> ?We have 23 spare bits in base and 0 in type, that would even the field
>>> a bit.
>>
>> Ah, OK. ?Yes, that's rather obvious.
>>
>> I don't see how this proposal is immune to Steven's complaint that
>> type-specific bits are moving into the generic bits. ?I think it is less
>> gross, though. ?I don't like Steven's approach of just making type
>> bigger; I think making all architectures pay for the needs of one
>> architecture is poor form, especially when there are other approaches
>> that avoid the cost.
>>
>> Richard, Steven, do either of you have complaints about moving the
>> lang_flag_* fields from type into base (renaming them into
>> type_lang_flag_*) to free up space instead of moving packed_flag?
>
> Hmm. ?I guess a more proper approach would be to try to remove
> one of the lang-specific flags and instead force the frontends to use
> flags in their TYPE_LANG_SPECIFIC structure. ?Ada seems to be
> the only one using all lang-specific flags - maybe there is an obvious
> candidate. ?Eric?
Or instead move the user_align flags from tree_type and tree_decl_common
to a common bit in tree_base.
Richard.
> Thanks,
> Richard.
>
>> -Nathan
>>
>