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: [PATCH] fix arm neon ICE by widening tree_type's precision field


On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 10:54 AM, Nathan Froyd<froydnj@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 08:36:27AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Any? ?What I mean is, instead of moving packed_flag from type to
>> type.common.base.packed_flag, you move lang_flag_6 from type to
>> type.common.base.lang_flag_7. ?Instead of having 7 language fields in
>> base and 7 in type, you have 8 and 6 respectively.
>>
>> Actually, what about moving all 7 language specific fields to base? ;-)
>> ?We have 23 spare bits in base and 0 in type, that would even the field
>> a bit.
>
> Ah, OK. ?Yes, that's rather obvious.
>
> I don't see how this proposal is immune to Steven's complaint that
> type-specific bits are moving into the generic bits. ?I think it is less
> gross, though. ?I don't like Steven's approach of just making type
> bigger; I think making all architectures pay for the needs of one
> architecture is poor form, especially when there are other approaches
> that avoid the cost.
>
> Richard, Steven, do either of you have complaints about moving the
> lang_flag_* fields from type into base (renaming them into
> type_lang_flag_*) to free up space instead of moving packed_flag?

Hmm.  I guess a more proper approach would be to try to remove
one of the lang-specific flags and instead force the frontends to use
flags in their TYPE_LANG_SPECIFIC structure.  Ada seems to be
the only one using all lang-specific flags - maybe there is an obvious
candidate.  Eric?

Thanks,
Richard.

> -Nathan
>


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