Bug 46495 - target.h and function.h require tm.h
Summary: target.h and function.h require tm.h
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Alias: None
Product: gcc
Classification: Unclassified
Component: middle-end (show other bugs)
Version: 4.6.0
: P3 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Not yet assigned to anyone
URL:
Keywords: internal-improvement
Depends on: 46500 46621
Blocks: 46489
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2010-11-16 05:21 UTC by Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke
Modified: 2021-08-30 04:10 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Host:
Target:
Build:
Known to work:
Known to fail:
Last reconfirmed:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke 2010-11-16 05:21:09 UTC
Because of their dependence on CUMULATIVE_ARGS and HARD_REG_SET,
target.h and function.h include tm.h  This needs to be rectified to stop
the uncontrolled use of target macros.
Comment 1 Eric Gallager 2019-01-08 03:44:12 UTC
(In reply to Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke from comment #0)
> Because of their dependence on CUMULATIVE_ARGS and HARD_REG_SET,
> target.h and function.h include tm.h  This needs to be rectified to stop
> the uncontrolled use of target macros.

How?
Comment 2 jsm-csl@polyomino.org.uk 2019-01-08 16:34:19 UTC
On Tue, 8 Jan 2019, egallager at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:

> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46495
> 
> Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
> 
>            What    |Removed                     |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                  CC|                            |egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
> 
> --- Comment #1 from Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> (In reply to Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke from comment #0)
> > Because of their dependence on CUMULATIVE_ARGS and HARD_REG_SET,
> > target.h and function.h include tm.h  This needs to be rectified to stop
> > the uncontrolled use of target macros.
> 
> How?

See bug 46500 for the introduction of cumulative_args_t.  There's still 
HARD_REG_SET to resolve (maybe similarly).