diff mbox

[029/236] rtl_data.x_parm_birth_insn is an insn

Message ID 1407345815-14551-30-git-send-email-dmalcolm@redhat.com
State New
Headers show

Commit Message

David Malcolm Aug. 6, 2014, 5:20 p.m. UTC
gcc/
	* function.h (struct rtl_data): Strengthen field
	"x_parm_birth_insn" from rtx to rtx_insn *.
	* function.c (struct assign_parm_data_all): Strengthen fields
	"first_conversion_insn" and "last_conversion_insn" from rtx to
	rtx_insn *.
---
 gcc/function.c | 4 ++--
 gcc/function.h | 2 +-
 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Comments

Jeff Law Aug. 13, 2014, 1:44 p.m. UTC | #1
On 08/06/14 11:20, David Malcolm wrote:
> gcc/
> 	* function.h (struct rtl_data): Strengthen field
> 	"x_parm_birth_insn" from rtx to rtx_insn *.
> 	* function.c (struct assign_parm_data_all): Strengthen fields
> 	"first_conversion_insn" and "last_conversion_insn" from rtx to
> 	rtx_insn *.
OK.  I think at this point any patch which merely changes the type of 
some variable or in a signature from rtx to rtx_insn (or any of the 
concrete passes) is considered trivial enough to go forward without 
explicit review.

That applies to patches in this series, additions you may need to make 
due to changes in the tree since you last rebased and further 
strengthening you or anyone else may want to tackle.



jeff
David Malcolm Aug. 13, 2014, 5:08 p.m. UTC | #2
On Wed, 2014-08-13 at 07:44 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 08/06/14 11:20, David Malcolm wrote:
> > gcc/
> > 	* function.h (struct rtl_data): Strengthen field
> > 	"x_parm_birth_insn" from rtx to rtx_insn *.
> > 	* function.c (struct assign_parm_data_all): Strengthen fields
> > 	"first_conversion_insn" and "last_conversion_insn" from rtx to
> > 	rtx_insn *.
> OK.  I think at this point any patch which merely changes the type of 
> some variable or in a signature from rtx to rtx_insn (or any of the 
> concrete passes) is considered trivial enough to go forward without 
           ^^^^^^
Presumably you meant "subclasses" here, right?

> explicit review.
> 
> That applies to patches in this series, additions you may need to make 
> due to changes in the tree since you last rebased and further 
> strengthening you or anyone else may want to tackle.

Heh - indeed, patch #30 needs a trivial fixup of the return type of the
helper function
  emit_note_eh_region_end
that was added in r212171, from rtx to rtx_note *.

[yes, I'm working on rebasing it all against today's trunk right now]

Thanks
Dave
Jeff Law Aug. 13, 2014, 5:13 p.m. UTC | #3
On 08/13/14 11:08, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-08-13 at 07:44 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 08/06/14 11:20, David Malcolm wrote:
>>> gcc/
>>> 	* function.h (struct rtl_data): Strengthen field
>>> 	"x_parm_birth_insn" from rtx to rtx_insn *.
>>> 	* function.c (struct assign_parm_data_all): Strengthen fields
>>> 	"first_conversion_insn" and "last_conversion_insn" from rtx to
>>> 	rtx_insn *.
>> OK.  I think at this point any patch which merely changes the type of
>> some variable or in a signature from rtx to rtx_insn (or any of the
>> concrete passes) is considered trivial enough to go forward without
>             ^^^^^^
> Presumably you meant "subclasses" here, right?
yes.

>
>> explicit review.
>>
>> That applies to patches in this series, additions you may need to make
>> due to changes in the tree since you last rebased and further
>> strengthening you or anyone else may want to tackle.
>
> Heh - indeed, patch #30 needs a trivial fixup of the return type of the
> helper function
>    emit_note_eh_region_end
> that was added in r212171, from rtx to rtx_note *.
>
> [yes, I'm working on rebasing it all against today's trunk right now]
:-)
Jeff
David Malcolm Aug. 19, 2014, 7:55 p.m. UTC | #4
On Wed, 2014-08-13 at 07:44 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 08/06/14 11:20, David Malcolm wrote:
> > gcc/
> > 	* function.h (struct rtl_data): Strengthen field
> > 	"x_parm_birth_insn" from rtx to rtx_insn *.
> > 	* function.c (struct assign_parm_data_all): Strengthen fields
> > 	"first_conversion_insn" and "last_conversion_insn" from rtx to
> > 	rtx_insn *.
> OK.  I think at this point any patch which merely changes the type of 
> some variable or in a signature from rtx to rtx_insn (or any of the 
> concrete passes) is considered trivial enough to go forward without 
> explicit review.
> 
> That applies to patches in this series, additions you may need to make 
> due to changes in the tree since you last rebased and further 
> strengthening you or anyone else may want to tackle.

Thanks.  Committed to trunk as r214191.
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/gcc/function.c b/gcc/function.c
index ec2ea26..4d8d32d 100644
--- a/gcc/function.c
+++ b/gcc/function.c
@@ -2181,8 +2181,8 @@  struct assign_parm_data_all
   struct args_size stack_args_size;
   tree function_result_decl;
   tree orig_fnargs;
-  rtx first_conversion_insn;
-  rtx last_conversion_insn;
+  rtx_insn *first_conversion_insn;
+  rtx_insn *last_conversion_insn;
   HOST_WIDE_INT pretend_args_size;
   HOST_WIDE_INT extra_pretend_bytes;
   int reg_parm_stack_space;
diff --git a/gcc/function.h b/gcc/function.h
index a8294b2..0367225 100644
--- a/gcc/function.h
+++ b/gcc/function.h
@@ -303,7 +303,7 @@  struct GTY(()) rtl_data {
   HOST_WIDE_INT x_frame_offset;
 
   /* Insn after which register parms and SAVE_EXPRs are born, if nonopt.  */
-  rtx x_parm_birth_insn;
+  rtx_insn *x_parm_birth_insn;
 
   /* List of all used temporaries allocated, by level.  */
   vec<temp_slot_p, va_gc> *x_used_temp_slots;