[PATCH v2 2/N] Introduce dump_flags_t type and use it instead of int, type.
Martin Liška
mliska@suse.cz
Wed May 17 09:06:00 GMT 2017
On 05/17/2017 09:44 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 4:55 PM, Martin Liška <mliska@suse.cz> wrote:
>> On 05/16/2017 03:48 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 3:00 PM, Martin Liška <mliska@suse.cz> wrote:
>>>> Second part changes 'int flags' to a new typedef.
>>>> All corresponding interfaces have been changed.
>>>>
>>>> Patch can bootstrap on ppc64le-redhat-linux and survives regression tests.
>>>>
>>>> Ready to be installed?
>>>
>>> @@ -113,6 +114,14 @@ enum tree_dump_index
>>> #define OPTGROUP_ALL (OPTGROUP_IPA | OPTGROUP_LOOP | OPTGROUP_INLINE \
>>> | OPTGROUP_OMP | OPTGROUP_VEC | OPTGROUP_OTHER)
>>>
>>> +/* Dump flags type. */
>>> +
>>> +typedef uint64_t dump_flags_t;
>>> +
>>> +/* Dump flags type. */
>>> +
>>> +typedef uint64_t dump_flags_t;
>>> +
>>>
>>> duplicate.
>>
>> Yes, wrong patch merge.
>>
>>>
>>> +#define TDF_NONE 0
>>>
>>> this now seems to "conflict" with
>>>
>>> #define TDF_LANG 0 /* is a lang-specific dump. */
>>>
>>> ?
>>
>> I'll make TDF_LANG 1 and will increment next TDF_KIND_MASK values.
>> Re-running regression tests.
>
> You'll have to adjust the & value as well then.
>
> I didn't mean to really change this but eventually just document the
> behavior of TDF_NONE to just affect the bits "above" TDF_KIND_MASK.
>
> Thus when you test for TDF_NONE you'd use
>
> TDF_FLAGS (flags) == TDF_NONE
>
> rather than flags == TDF_NONE.
You are right, I've just added comment of the original version and installed as r248140.
Martin
>
> RIchard.
>
>> Martin
>>
>>>
>>> that is, TDF_RTL | TDF_NONE would still be "none" conceptually ...
>>>
>>> Ok with the duplicate typedef removed.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Richard.
>>>
>>>> Martin
>>
More information about the Gcc-patches
mailing list