This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: include tree.h instead of tree-core.h in expr.h
- From: Prathamesh Kulkarni <bilbotheelffriend at gmail dot com>
- To: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at google dot com>
- Cc: Andrew MacLeod <amacleod at redhat dot com>, gcc <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 19:23:59 +0530
- Subject: Re: include tree.h instead of tree-core.h in expr.h
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAJXstsBf2SwFfiOQLrqrdfiEm6oYk1HBn+c2pOZFM57awdhqGA at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAD_=9DQxa3GMc986-1AZOgdtHM-XxwXyyv3L9b1C2TDmpu6q3A at mail dot gmail dot com> <52B1A137 dot 4030903 at redhat dot com> <CAD_=9DSeYRB6FGScTq+UUr+R9=OSTE7D-5xoh8rvuAcCgOo8CA at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAJXstsCXdw1Jq4q-UwbuqpAtfTKeL6n9+rZ+K=GZJXDW7Lv5iQ at mail dot gmail dot com>
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 7:13 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
<bilbotheelffriend@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 6:54 PM, Diego Novillo <dnovillo@google.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 8:20 AM, Andrew MacLeod <amacleod@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> On 12/18/2013 08:08 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 6:57 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>>>> <bilbotheelffriend@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Would it be better to include tree.h instead of tree-core.h (tree.h
>>>>> includes tree-core.h anyway), or shall I leave these macros untouched
>>>>> ?
>>>>
>>>> Better leave these macros intact for now. We are trying to flatten out
>>>> the #include tree. Adding tree.h to another header goes in the
>>>> opposite direction.
>>>>
>>>> Please add a note describing the conflict.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Looks like function.c is the primary user of {ADD,SUB}_PARM_SIZE, with a
>>> single use of ADD_PARM_SIZE in calls.c I'd suggest moving both new
>>> functions to function.c and exporting the protoype for add_parm_size() in
>>> function.h. calls.c already include function.h.
>>>
>>> I can't imagine that call to ADD_PARM_SIZE in calls.c having much impact on
>>> compile time...
>>
>> Ah, yes, if the usage pattern of these macros is so simple, that's a
>> better option.
>>
>>
>> Diego.
>
> ADD_PARM_SIZE is called at 4 places from the following callers:
> File Function Line
> 0 calls.c initialize_argument_information 1356
> ADD_PARM_SIZE (*args_size, args[i].locate.size.var);
> 1 function.c assign_parm_is_stack_parm 2566 ADD_PARM_SIZE
> (all->stack_args_size, data->locate.size.var);
> 2 function.c locate_and_pad_parm 3866 ADD_PARM_SIZE
> (locate->size, sizetree);
> 3 function.c pad_below 3959
> ADD_PARM_SIZE (*offset_ptr, s2);
sorry for the bad formatting.
ADD_PARM_SIZE is called at following places: http://pastebin.com/SiUfkX3F
>
> As suggested by Andrew, I shall move them into function.c and export
> their prototype in function.h
>
> Thanks and Regards,
> Prathamesh