This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH i386 AVX512] [81/n] Add new built-ins.
- From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- To: Kirill Yukhin <kirill dot yukhin at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com>, Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 16:20:15 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH i386 AVX512] [81/n] Add new built-ins.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20141020134122 dot GB12661 at msticlxl57 dot ims dot intel dot com> <20141020135019 dot GP10376 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <20141021140805 dot GA22695 at msticlxl57 dot ims dot intel dot com>
- Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 06:08:15PM +0400, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> --- a/gcc/tree.h
> +++ b/gcc/tree.h
> @@ -2334,6 +2334,10 @@ extern void decl_value_expr_insert (tree, tree);
> #define DECL_COMDAT(NODE) \
> (DECL_WITH_VIS_CHECK (NODE)->decl_with_vis.comdat_flag)
> + /* In a FUNCTION_DECL indicates that a static chain is needed. */
> +#define DECL_STATIC_CHAIN(NODE) \
> + (DECL_WITH_VIS_CHECK (NODE)->decl_with_vis.regdecl_flag)
I would say that you should still keep it together with the FUNCTION_DECL
macros and use FUNCTION_DECL_CHECK there, to make it clear we don't want
the macro to be used on VAR_DECLs etc.
So just s/function_decl/decl_with_vis/ in the definition IMHO.
Also, with so many added builtins, how does it affect
compilation time at -O0? If it is significant, maybe it is highest time to
make the md builtin decl building more lazy.