Re: [PATCH][4/N] Introduce new inline functions for GET_MODE_UNIT_SIZE and GET_MODE_UNIT_PRECISION

[Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>]

On 08/17/2015 05:38 AM, David Sherwood wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is the last patch in the series. It follows on from:
>
> [PATCH][3/N] Replace the pattern GET_MODE_BITSIZE (GET_MODE_INNER (m))
> with GET_MODE_UNIT_BITSIZE (m)
>
> As a simple optimisation, introduce new inline functions for GET_MODE_UNIT_SIZE
> and GET_MODE_UNIT_PRECISION in machmode.h so that we can reduce two inline
> calls, i.e. GET_MODE_INNER and GET_MODE_SIZE, into one.
>
> Tested:
> aarch64 and aarch64_be - no regressions in gcc testsuite
> x86_64 - bootstrap build, no testsuite regressions
> arm-none-eabi - no regressions in gcc testsuite
>
> Good to go?
> David.
>
> ChangeLog:
>
> 2015-07-17  David Sherwood  <david.sherwood@arm.com>
>
>      gcc/
>          * genmodes.c (emit_mode_unit_size_inline): New function.
>          (emit_mode_unit_precision_inline): New function.
>          (emit_insn_modes_h): Emit new #define.  Emit new functions.
>          (emit_mode_unit_size): New function.
>          (emit_mode_unit_precision): New function.
>          (emit_mode_adjustments): Add mode_unit_size adjustments.
>          (emit_insn_modes_c): Emit new arrays.
>          * machmode.h (GET_MODE_UNIT_SIZE, GET_MODE_UNIT_PRECISION): Update to
>          use new inline methods.
I asked Richard S. to give this a once-over which he did.  However, he 
technically can't approve due to the way his maintainership position was 
worded.

The one request would be a function comment for emit_mode_unit_size and 
emit_mode_unit_precision.  OK with that change.

Thanks,
Jeff