On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:20 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 7:47 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: >> 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. >> > > Here is a patch to remove MaskExists. The difference between the old > options.h and the new options.h on Linux/x86-64 are > ... > The same set of macros are provided. The only differences are the > order of bits used and macro definitions. I am doing a full bootstrap and > test on Linux/x86-64. OK for trunk if there are no regressions? > > I will submit a separate patch to remove MaskExists from all *.opt files after > this patch is installed. > > Thanks. > > > -- > H.J. > ---- > 2012-03-26 H.J. Lu <hongjiu...@intel.com> > > * opth-gen.awk: Allocated a bit for Mask and InverseMask if it > hasn't been allocated. Define a target macro for Mask and > InverseMask if it hasn't been defined. Remove MaskExists > handling. > > * doc/options.texi: Remove MaskNeeded.
There are no regressions on Linux/x86-64. OK for trunk? Thanks. -- H.J.