From patchwork Fri Sep 23 10:04:18 2016 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Jakub Jelinek X-Patchwork-Id: 674022 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]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3sgTVZ2JQqz9t0v for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2016 20:04:37 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gcc.gnu.org header.i=@gcc.gnu.org header.b=pUQKHIST; dkim-atps=neutral DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gcc.gnu.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-archive:list-post:list-help:sender:date :from:to:cc:subject:message-id:reply-to:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; q=dns; s=default; b=TyExxWXATKCz1M8is 1kXR+aleInV/jcZ0+J5Stlkf8IGYCmEUM3KIuI/sCyo2wgtnD/ZPpu2lMm8sEtou 4brIsHXFLYTa6zxcqVCGBrQcXnfsAK4jv+UiGzUoFF9maY923f7ADX96IV8P4R0N 7DYwyFgCl/btLBzZogl85y2vMs= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-archive:list-post:list-help:sender:date :from:to:cc:subject:message-id:reply-to:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=default; bh=q75sRZiGBianZTbMo7U31hw dWLw=; b=pUQKHISThKKT1Q1KD+VKVZ61od02IA+u9KbtVJmtcVM+m+7TTwKAWeK hw9NDLYMEtKIxbnzJ1KpVC7ysQeYuhumDOfhjVT94gP4sQIoObvU2qKL2jmZQI96 QFTJ56fQusCLteu9qHDgKYLT2bg8CKRnkaefB/yN1ifRrHnlE/CE= Received: (qmail 88354 invoked by alias); 23 Sep 2016 10:04:27 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 88336 invoked by uid 89); 23 Sep 2016 10:04:26 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-5.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, RP_MATCHES_RCVD, SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=ubizjak@gmail.com, ubizjakgmailcom, letter X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 23 Sep 2016 10:04:25 +0000 Received: from int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3EF979E614; Fri, 23 Sep 2016 10:04:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (ovpn-204-43.brq.redhat.com [10.40.204.43]) by int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u8NA4M50015603 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 23 Sep 2016 06:04:23 -0400 Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id u8NA4K7x018389; Fri, 23 Sep 2016 12:04:20 +0200 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id u8NA4IId018388; Fri, 23 Sep 2016 12:04:18 +0200 Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 12:04:18 +0200 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Uros Bizjak Cc: "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" , Andre.SimoesDiasVieira@arm.com, Paolo Carlini , Richard Earnshaw Subject: Re: [PATCHv3][ARM] -mpure-code option for ARM Message-ID: <20160923100418.GM7282@tucnak.redhat.com> Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-IsSubscribed: yes On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 10:37:21PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote: > diff --git a/gcc/hooks.c b/gcc/hooks.c > index 99ec4014adb6fcbb073bf538dd00fe8695ee6cb2..1e925645c3173f8d97e104b9b2f480fca2ede438 > 100644 > --- a/gcc/hooks.c > +++ b/gcc/hooks.c > @@ -481,3 +481,13 @@ void > hook_void_gcc_optionsp (struct gcc_options *opts ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED) > { > } > + > +/* Generic hook that takes an unsigned int, an unsigned int pointer and > + returns false. */ > + > +bool > +hook_uint_uintp_false (unsigned int, unsigned int *) > +{ > + return false; > +} > > > The name of this hook doesn't adhere to the convention. It should be named: > > hook_bool_uint_uintp_false You're right, I've committed this as obvious: 2016-09-23 Uros Bizjak Jakub Jelinek * hooks.h (hook_uint_uintp_false): Rename to... (hook_bool_uint_uintp_false): ... this. * hooks.c (hook_uint_uintp_false): Rename to... (hook_bool_uint_uintp_false): ... this. * target.def (elf_flags_numeric): Use hook_bool_uint_uintp_false instead of hook_uint_uintp_false. Jakub --- gcc/hooks.h.jj 2016-09-23 09:32:13.000000000 +0200 +++ gcc/hooks.h 2016-09-23 11:57:28.116738504 +0200 @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ extern void hook_void_tree (tree); extern void hook_void_tree_treeptr (tree, tree *); extern void hook_void_int_int (int, int); extern void hook_void_gcc_optionsp (struct gcc_options *); -extern bool hook_uint_uintp_false (unsigned int, unsigned int *); +extern bool hook_bool_uint_uintp_false (unsigned int, unsigned int *); extern int hook_int_uint_mode_1 (unsigned int, machine_mode); extern int hook_int_const_tree_0 (const_tree); --- gcc/hooks.c.jj 2016-09-23 09:32:13.000000000 +0200 +++ gcc/hooks.c 2016-09-23 11:57:39.938588268 +0200 @@ -486,8 +486,7 @@ hook_void_gcc_optionsp (struct gcc_optio returns false. */ bool -hook_uint_uintp_false (unsigned int, unsigned int *) +hook_bool_uint_uintp_false (unsigned int, unsigned int *) { return false; } - --- gcc/target.def.jj 2016-09-23 09:32:13.000000000 +0200 +++ gcc/target.def 2016-09-23 11:59:03.581525303 +0200 @@ -446,7 +446,7 @@ instead of the normal sequence of letter defined, or if it returns false, then @var{num} will be ignored and the\n\ traditional letter sequence will be emitted.", bool, (unsigned int flags, unsigned int *num), - hook_uint_uintp_false) + hook_bool_uint_uintp_false) /* Return preferred text (sub)section for function DECL. Main purpose of this function is to separate cold, normal and hot