On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 4:53 AM, Joseph S. Myers <jos...@codesourcery.com> wrote: > On Sun, 25 Mar 2012, H.J. Lu wrote: > >> Hi Joseph, >> >> I need to support InverseMask(XXX) in options without the corresponding >> Mask(XXX) since XXX is never set directly via a command line option. This >> patch adds a MaskNeeded property which turns InverseMask(XXX) into >> the inverse version of Mask(XXX), which allocates a unique bit and defines >> the same set of macros as Mask(XXX). Does it look OK? > > I'd have thought that either Mask or InverseMask with a given mask name > (or a standalone target mask record) should cause allocation (only once, > no matter how many options use the same mask name), and MaskExists should > be removed, rather than adding MaskNeeded - if I understood correctly the > purpose for which you are adding MaskNeeded. >
That is correct. I will work on a patch to remove MaskExists. Thanks. -- H.J.