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, mips] Fix for PR target/56942


Richard Sandiford <rdsandiford@googlemail.com> writes:
> Steven Bosscher <stevenb.gcc@gmail.com> writes:
>> I dont like this at all.      At the very least, if we go this way,
>> then all places where next_active_insn is used should be updated.
>> Otherwise this is just confusion proliferation.
>
> You mean all places where next_active_insn is used to get the jump table?
> That would be fine with me, but as author of the original change,
> I'm going to ask you to do that if you feel strongly about it :-)
> Otherwise Steve's patch seems fine to me.
>
>> Before my patch most
>> ports used the "active" variants and I specifically did non fix the
>> "real" variants. It is marked fixme for a reason: The JUMP_TABLE_DATA
>> should always follow immediately after the label. Copying the fixme is
>> a step in the wrong direction. Please do not commit this patch!
>
> But you didn't respond to my main point.  It always used to be the
> case that all "active" insns were also "real".  I.e. "real" was a
> _more_ restrictive condition than "active".

Gah, I really wish proof reads before hitting "send" were as effective
as those after.  Obviously that should read: "active" was a _more_
restrictive condition than "real".

Richard


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