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]

Re: [patches] Re: PRE_DEC/PUSH_ROUNDING inconsistency fix

To: Neil Booth <NeilB at earthling dot net>
Subject: Re: [patches] Re: PRE_DEC/PUSH_ROUNDING inconsistency fix
From: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 21:53:20 +0100
Cc: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>, Richard Henderson <rth at cygnus dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, patches at x86-64 dot org
References: <20001104104239.A20422@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <20001107110328.E15312@cygnus.com> <20001108145556.C9671@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <20001108200109.B32588@daikokuya.demon.co.uk>

> Jan Hubicka wrote:-
> 
> > ./convex/convex.h:#define PUSH_ROUNDING(BYTES) (((BYTES) + 4) & ~3)
> > 
> > ./pj/pj.h:#define PUSH_ROUNDING(NPUSHED)  (((NPUSHED) + 3) & ~3)
> > 
> > ./sh/sh.h:#define PUSH_ROUNDING(NPUSHED)  (((NPUSHED) + 3) & ~3)
> > 
> > ./we32k/we32k.h:#define PUSH_ROUNDING(BYTES) (((BYTES) + 3) & ~3)
> 
> Hmm.  I don't know this part of the compiler at all, but it looks to
> me like convex.h has a bug, no?
Probably not - I don't know how did the number 4 got to my summary, but I
am reading the line:
#define PUSH_ROUNDING(BYTES) (((BYTES) + 3) & ~3)

Honza
> 
> Neil.

References:
- PRE_DEC/PUSH_ROUNDING inconsistency fix
  - From: Jan Hubicka
- Re: PRE_DEC/PUSH_ROUNDING inconsistency fix
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: [patches] Re: PRE_DEC/PUSH_ROUNDING inconsistency fix
  - From: Jan Hubicka

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