From patchwork Mon Apr 18 21:28:18 2011 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Gerald Pfeifer X-Patchwork-Id: 91870 Return-Path: X-Original-To: incoming@patchwork.ozlabs.org Delivered-To: patchwork-incoming@bilbo.ozlabs.org Received: from sourceware.org (server1.sourceware.org [209.132.180.131]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 57ECCB6F1B for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 07:28:38 +1000 (EST) Received: (qmail 9439 invoked by alias); 18 Apr 2011 21:28:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 9430 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Apr 2011 21:28:34 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL, BAYES_20, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from relay01.pair.com (HELO relay01.pair.com) (209.68.5.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with SMTP; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 21:28:19 +0000 Received: (qmail 31440 invoked from network); 18 Apr 2011 21:28:17 -0000 Received: from 2.204.84.62 (HELO ip-2-204-84-62.web.vodafone.de) (2.204.84.62) by relay01.pair.com with SMTP; 18 Apr 2011 21:28:17 -0000 X-pair-Authenticated: 2.204.84.62 Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 23:28:18 +0200 (CEST) From: Gerald Pfeifer To: crquan@gmail.com, "Dennis, CHENG Renquan" cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Laurynas Biveinis , =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Manuel_L=F3pez-Ib=E1=F1ez?= Subject: Re: [PATCH] passes.texi: fill crossref nodes (GCC Internals) In-Reply-To: <1278820035-18384-1-git-send-email-crquan@gmail.com> Message-ID: References: <1278820035-18384-1-git-send-email-crquan@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Hi there, On Sun, 11 Jul 2010, crquan@gmail.com wrote: > From: "Dennis, CHENG Renquan" > > Tested with "make info pdf". it seems your patch fell through the cracks. Sorry about that! I have now reviewed it, adjusted the ChangeLog entry, and committed it to the current development head as well as the GCC 4.6 branch after build tests there, too. If you have further patches, please let us know! And do not hesitate to ping a patch if you are not seeing any response within a week. Gerald 2011-04-17 Dennis, CHENG Renquan * doc/passes.texi: Fill crossref nodes. Index: doc/passes.texi =================================================================== --- doc/passes.texi (revision 172618) +++ doc/passes.texi (working copy) @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -@c markers: CROSSREF BUG TODO +@c markers: BUG TODO @c Copyright (C) 1988, 1989, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, @c 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 @@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ The language front end is invoked only once, via @code{lang_hooks.parse_file}, to parse the entire input. The language front end may use any intermediate language representation deemed -appropriate. The C front end uses GENERIC trees (CROSSREF), plus +appropriate. The C front end uses GENERIC trees (@pxref{GENERIC}), plus a double handful of language specific tree codes defined in @file{c-common.def}. The Fortran front end uses a completely different private representation. @@ -46,10 +46,9 @@ At some point the front end must translate the representation used in the front end to a representation understood by the language-independent portions of the compiler. Current practice takes one of two forms. -The C front end manually invokes the gimplifier (CROSSREF) on each function, +The C front end manually invokes the gimplifier (@pxref{GIMPLE}) on each function, and uses the gimplifier callbacks to convert the language-specific tree -nodes directly to GIMPLE (CROSSREF) before passing the function off to -be compiled. +nodes directly to GIMPLE before passing the function off to be compiled. The Fortran front end converts from a private representation to GENERIC, which is later lowered to GIMPLE when the function is compiled. Which route to choose probably depends on how well GENERIC (plus extensions) @@ -111,11 +110,10 @@ @cindex GIMPLE @dfn{Gimplification} is a whimsical term for the process of converting the intermediate representation of a function into the GIMPLE language -(CROSSREF). The term stuck, and so words like ``gimplification'', +(@pxref{GIMPLE}). The term stuck, and so words like ``gimplification'', ``gimplify'', ``gimplifier'' and the like are sprinkled throughout this section of code. -@cindex GENERIC While a front end may certainly choose to generate GIMPLE directly if it chooses, this can be a moderately complex process unless the intermediate language used by the front end is already fairly simple.