On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 08:02:08AM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 01:09:24PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> > IN_RANGE(POS...) makes sure that POS is a non-negative number
> > smaller than UPPER, so (UPPER) - (POS) does not wrap. Or is there
> > some case that the new mac
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 01:09:24PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> How about this:
>
> --
> /* A convenience macro to determine whether a SIZE lies inclusively
>within [1, UPPER], POS lies inclusively within between
>[0, UPPER - 1] and the sum lies inclusively within [1, UPPER].
>UPPER mu
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 03:31:40AM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> Hi Dominik,
>
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 04:53:47PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> > +/* A convenience macro to determine whether a SIZE lies inclusively
> > + within [1, RANGE], POS lies inclusively within between
> > + [0, RA
Hi Dominik,
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 04:53:47PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> +/* A convenience macro to determine whether a SIZE lies inclusively
> + within [1, RANGE], POS lies inclusively within between
> + [0, RANGE - 1] and the sum lies inclusively within [1, RANGE]. */
> +#define SIZE_POS
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 04:53:03PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> The following two patches fix PR 77822 on s390x for gcc-7. As the
> macro doing the argument range checks can be used on other targets
> as well, I've put it in system.h (couldn't think of a better
> place; maybe rtl.h?).
>
> Bootstr
