This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: DECL_RTL vs. explicit make_decl_rtl calls
- From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
- To: "David S. Miller" <davem at redhat dot com>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, mark at codesourcery dot com
- Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 08:52:43 -0700
- Subject: Re: DECL_RTL vs. explicit make_decl_rtl calls
- References: <20020530.040206.114549125.davem@redhat.com> <20020530114636.B5287@redhat.com> <20020613.025639.16264375.davem@redhat.com>
On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 02:56:39AM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
> 1) ENCODE_SECTION_INFO, in several backends, expect that it will be
> called on each function declaration. It also wants to have the
> DECL_RTL() formed by the time it is called so Richard's idea
> of just calling ENCODE_SECTION_INFO directly won't work.
[...]
> Now, thinking more about #1 it really shouldn't matter. If we were to
> omit these explicit make_decl_rtl calls we would end up calling
> ENCODE_SECTION_INFO if we ever try to get at the DECL_RTL.
Except when the DECL_RTL already exists. You don't want to
elide the call to ENCODE_SECTION_INFO in that case.
> There is also a bunch of stuff in make_decl_rtl dealing with mode
> changes if we've got the DECL_RTL already. Does this really happen?
Yes. Incomplete types and all that.
r~