This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH 4/6] Shrink-wrapping
- From: Paul Koning <paul_koning at dell dot com>
- To: Bernd Schmidt <bernds at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Richard Sandiford <richard dot sandiford at linaro dot org>
- Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2011 12:58:29 -0400
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] Shrink-wrapping
- References: <4D8A0703.9090306@codesourcery.com> <4D8A095C.8050809@codesourcery.com> <g4vcvegnx9.fsf@linaro.org> <4E15D2DC.9010704@codesourcery.com>
On Jul 7, 2011, at 11:38 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> ...
>
>> It'd also be nice to get rid of all these big blocks of code that are
>> conditional on preprocessor macros, but I realise you're just following
>> existing practice in the surrounding code, so again it can be left to
>> a future cleanup.
>
> Yeah, this function is quite horrid - so many different paths through it.
>
> However, it looks like the only target without HAVE_prologue is actually
> pdp11, so we're carrying some unnecessary baggage for purely
> retrocomputing purposes. Paul, can you fix that?
Sure, but... I searched for HAVE_prologue and I can't find any place that set it. There are tests for it, but I see nothing that defines it (other than df-scan.c which defines it as zero if it's not defined, not sure what the point of that is).
I must be missing something...
paul