Re: [PATCH 1/2] add staticly checked label_nuses accessors

2014-09-11 Thread Jeff Law
On 09/05/14 16:38, Trevor Saunders wrote: So, in this case it seems to me you basically have two options A. change the macro to an inline function, and fix up all the callers to pass the right type. Then rebase that into some sort of reasonable patch series. b. add a function with a

Re: [PATCH 1/2] add staticly checked label_nuses accessors

2014-09-11 Thread Jeff Law
On 09/05/14 15:57, David Malcolm wrote: One other aspect of my approach is that (believe it or not) I'm trying to minimize the size of the changes, to avoid introducing pain when backporting bugfixes from trunk to the branches. Right. I believe and know you're trying to avoid unnecessary pain

Re: [PATCH 1/2] add staticly checked label_nuses accessors

2014-09-11 Thread Trevor Saunders
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 02:55:43PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: On 09/05/14 16:38, Trevor Saunders wrote: So, in this case it seems to me you basically have two options A. change the macro to an inline function, and fix up all the callers to pass the right type. Then rebase that into some sort

Re: [PATCH 1/2] add staticly checked label_nuses accessors

2014-09-09 Thread Richard Sandiford
Trevor Saunders tsaund...@mozilla.com writes: I also do think the advantages of using members outways the cost. For one thing functions with all caps names are just weird. I think the more important reason though is that it will help make rtx_insn be a separate class sometime in the far

[PATCH 1/2] add staticly checked label_nuses accessors

2014-09-05 Thread tsaunders
From: Trevor Saunders tsaund...@mozilla.com Hi, Doing this means we get to remove a fair chunk of runtime checking. bootstrapped + regtested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu with no regressions. config-list.mk with this and the next patch is ongoing. ok? Trev gcc/ * config/i386/i386.c,

Re: [PATCH 1/2] add staticly checked label_nuses accessors

2014-09-05 Thread Jeff Law
On 09/05/14 09:32, tsaund...@mozilla.com wrote: From: Trevor Saunders tsaund...@mozilla.com Hi, Doing this means we get to remove a fair chunk of runtime checking. bootstrapped + regtested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu with no regressions. config-list.mk with this and the next patch is

Re: [PATCH 1/2] add staticly checked label_nuses accessors

2014-09-05 Thread Trevor Saunders
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 10:43:45AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: On 09/05/14 09:32, tsaund...@mozilla.com wrote: From: Trevor Saunders tsaund...@mozilla.com Hi, Doing this means we get to remove a fair chunk of runtime checking. bootstrapped + regtested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu with no

Re: [PATCH 1/2] add staticly checked label_nuses accessors

2014-09-05 Thread David Malcolm
On Fri, 2014-09-05 at 10:43 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: On 09/05/14 09:32, tsaund...@mozilla.com wrote: From: Trevor Saunders tsaund...@mozilla.com Hi, Doing this means we get to remove a fair chunk of runtime checking. bootstrapped + regtested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu with no

Re: [PATCH 1/2] add staticly checked label_nuses accessors

2014-09-05 Thread Trevor Saunders
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 05:57:13PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote: On Fri, 2014-09-05 at 10:43 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: On 09/05/14 09:32, tsaund...@mozilla.com wrote: From: Trevor Saunders tsaund...@mozilla.com Hi, Doing this means we get to remove a fair chunk of runtime checking.