This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] PowerPC address support clean, patch 4 of 4
- From: Segher Boessenkool <segher at kernel dot crashing dot org>
- To: Michael Meissner <meissner at linux dot ibm dot com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, David Edelsohn <dje dot gcc at gmail dot com>, Bill Schmidt <wschmidt at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>
- Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 16:55:02 -0500
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] PowerPC address support clean, patch 4 of 4
- References: <20180503171703.GA4233@ibm-toto.the-meissners.org> <20180503172324.GC5549@ibm-toto.the-meissners.org>
Hi,
On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 01:23:24PM -0400, Michael Meissner wrote:
> -/* Helper function to say whether a mode supports PRE_INC or PRE_DEC. */
> +/* Helper function to say whether a mode supports PRE_INC or PRE_DEC in a given
> + reload register class or if some reload register class supports it. */
> static inline bool
> -mode_supports_pre_incdec_p (machine_mode mode)
> +mode_supports_pre_incdec_p (machine_mode mode,
> + enum rs6000_reload_reg_type rt = RELOAD_REG_ANY)
> {
> - return ((reg_addr[mode].addr_mask[RELOAD_REG_ANY] & RELOAD_REG_PRE_INCDEC)
> - != 0);
> + return ((reg_addr[mode].addr_mask[rt] & RELOAD_REG_PRE_INCDEC) != 0);
> }
Same issue here: does the default argument help, or hurt? The function
names now do not describe what the function does, either :-/
Segher