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: less use of optabs/insn-codes, 3/n


On Aug 21, 2001, Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 20, 2001 at 07:21:45PM -0400, Zack Weinberg wrote:
>> * expmed.c (mode_for_extraction): New function.
>> (store_bit_field, extract_bit_field): Use it.
>> * expr.h: Prototype it and provide an enum for its first argument.
>> 
>> * combine.c, function.c, recog.c: Don't include insn-codes.h.
>> Use mode_for_extraction rather than testing HAVE_insv/extv/extzv
>> and digging through the insn_data tables.
>> * Makefile.in: Update dependencies.

> I can't say I'm thrilled with the interface to mode_for_extraction,
> but I couldn't come up with anything else I liked either.

> Ok.

Err...  This breaks mn10300-elf, because some references to
CODE_FOR_{insv,extzv,extv} in {store,extract}_bit_field() that used to
be protected by #ifdef HAVE_{insv_extzv,extv} are no longer #ifdefed
out when such instructions aren't available.  I've got a patch that
#ifdefs them out, but I suppose you had something else in mind to
remove those references too, Zack.  Didn't you?

-- 
Alexandre Oliva   Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer                  aoliva@{cygnus.com, redhat.com}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp        oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist    *Please* write to mailing lists, not to me


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