On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 06:23:22PM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 12/09/2015 05:24 PM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> >
> >In addition to that, how about we split up gcc/omp-low.c into several
> >files? Would it make sense (I have not yet looked in detail) to do so
> >along the borders of the several passes defined therein? Or, can you
> >tell already that there would be too many cross-references between the
> >several files to make this infeasible?
>
> It would be nice to get rid of all the code duplication in that file. That
> alone could reduce the size by quite a bit, and hopefully make it easier to
> read.
What exact code duplication do you mean?
> I suspect a split along the ompexp/omplow boundary would be quite easy to
> achieve.
Yeah, that might be the possible splitting boundary (have omp-low.c,
omp-exp.c).
> >I'd suggest to do this shortly before GCC 6 is released, so that
> >backports from trunk to gcc-6-branch will be easy. (I assume we don't
> >have to care for gcc-5-branch backports too much any longer.)
>
> I'll declare myself agnostic as to whether such a change is appropriate for
> gcc-6 at this stage. I guess it kind of depends on the specifics.
Certainly. On one side I'd say it is too late now in stage3, on the other
side when would be better time to do that, during stage1 people will have
more likely out of the tree branches with more changes (I'm aware we even
now have the HSA, OpenMP -> PTX and OpenACC branches).
So, if somebody wants to try that, we can see if the result would be
appropriate.
Jakub
