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]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: RFA: xscale-elf -mstrict-prototypes


> AAPCS section 5.5 rule B.2.  Since the caller is required to extend the 
> value, there is clearly no need for the callee to do so.
OK.  Thanks for the clarification.

> Even the ATPCS (and the APCS before that) had a similar requirement, 
> though expressed differently.  The fact that GCC has been overly 
> conservative is a bug that I've long wanted to fix.
:
> > OK.  I wasn't sure how conservative we should be.
> 
> GCC has promoted arguments in the caller now for so long, that I see no 
> need to worry about backwards compatibility problems.
Good, that's easier.

> > So you're suggesting that I reduce my patch to something like the
> > following?
> > config/arm/arm.c:
> > -#define TARGET_PROMOTE_PROTOTYPES hook_bool_tree_true
> > +#define TARGET_PROMOTE_PROTOTYPES hook_bool_tree_false
> > 
> 
> Provided this doesn't also inhibit the caller-side promotion, yes.
I don't think so, but I'll double check and make up a complete patch.

Thanks,
Jim.

-- 
James Lemke   jim@wasabisystems.com   Orillia, Ontario
http://www.wasabisystems.com


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