This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [6/8] Add strict volatile handling to bit_field_mode_iterator

Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou@adacore.com> writes:
>> OK.  The current recursive force-mem-to-reg cases in store_bit_field_1
>> and extract_bit_field_1 don't handle -fstrict-volatile-bitfields at all,
>> so this patch was trying to fix what seemed like an oversight.  Is it OK
>> to leave the code as-is (not handling -fstrict-volatile-bitfields),
>> or do I need to add new code to the expmed.c routines?
>
> The former, I think.

OK, I left this patch out and removed the associated constructor argument
from patch 7.

Richard
Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]