Re: [PATCH 1/3] Put a TARGET_LRA_P into every target

On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 12:04:23PM -0700, Mike Stump wrote: > On Sep 16, 2016, at 6:40 AM, Segher Boessenkool > wrote: > > > > Does just "The default version of this target hook returns true." sound > > better? I.e. delete "always". > > That is fine. Okay, I'll

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Put a TARGET_LRA_P into every target

On Sep 16, 2016, at 6:40 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > Does just "The default version of this target hook returns true." sound > better? I.e. delete "always". That is fine.

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Put a TARGET_LRA_P into every target

On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 12:26:42PM +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > On Wed, 14 Sep 2016, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > 2016-09-14 Segher Boessenkool > > > > * target.def (lra_p): Change commentary (for the manual) for the > > new default. > > *

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Put a TARGET_LRA_P into every target

> "returns always true" -> "always returns true" ? > > (The former is how we'd say it in German, and hence might be common in > Dutch as well? In English, both probably are fine, the latter feeling > more natural to me. But then, I'm not a native speaker. ;-) The former is unusual in English

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Put a TARGET_LRA_P into every target

On Wed, 14 Sep 2016, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > 2016-09-14 Segher Boessenkool > > * target.def (lra_p): Change commentary (for the manual) for the > new default. > * doc/tm.texi: Regenerate. "returns always true" -> "always returns true" ? (The

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Put a TARGET_LRA_P into every target

On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 07:46:13AM -0500, Peter Bergner wrote: > On 9/14/16 5:35 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > (I hope the wording is strong enough). > Maybe s/New ports should use LRA/New ports must use LRA/ ? Yeah maybe. Does anyone else have an opinion on this? Cc:ing gcc@... > >+ New

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Put a TARGET_LRA_P into every target

On 9/14/16 5:35 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 02:38:54PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: I believe a doc update of some kind is in order. With the doc update the entire series is OK. Good catch, thanks. My tests finished, all results identical. I'll add the following patch

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Put a TARGET_LRA_P into every target

On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 02:38:54PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > I believe a doc update of some kind is in order. With the doc update > the entire series is OK. Good catch, thanks. My tests finished, all results identical. I'll add the following patch for the doc update (I hope the wording is

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Put a TARGET_LRA_P into every target

On 09/12/2016 04:22 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: This patch adds a TARGET_LRA_P (defined to hook_bool_void_false) to every target that didn't yet override the hook. No functional change. Segher 2016-09-12 Segher Boessenkool * config/alpha/alpha.c

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Put a TARGET_LRA_P into every target

On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 04:15:45PM +, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Tue, 13 Sep 2016, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > > Yes, many targets need the hook definition after this series; that should > > stick out like a sore thumb, help to remind people to change their target > > to use LRA (not a huge

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Put a TARGET_LRA_P into every target

On Sep 13, 2016, at 9:07 AM, Jeff Law wrote: > > On 09/13/2016 09:45 AM, Peter Bergner wrote: >> On 9/13/16 9:26 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote: >>> On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 12:03 PM, Segher Boessenkool And all new ports should use LRA, so it should be the default. >>> >>> I am

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Put a TARGET_LRA_P into every target

On Tue, 13 Sep 2016, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > Yes, many targets need the hook definition after this series; that should > stick out like a sore thumb, help to remind people to change their target > to use LRA (not a huge amount of work for most, although it can get tricky). I would also

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Put a TARGET_LRA_P into every target

On 09/13/2016 09:45 AM, Peter Bergner wrote: On 9/13/16 9:26 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote: On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 12:03 PM, Segher Boessenkool And all new ports should use LRA, so it should be the default. Since nobody else has said anything on this patch besides Bernd, I am going to say yes

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Put a TARGET_LRA_P into every target

On 09/13/2016 04:26 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: On 09/13/2016 12:22 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: This patch adds a TARGET_LRA_P (defined to hook_bool_void_false) to every target that didn't yet override the hook. No functional change. This patch series makes very little sense to me. Adding 35

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Put a TARGET_LRA_P into every target

On 9/13/16 9:26 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote: On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 12:03 PM, Segher Boessenkool And all new ports should use LRA, so it should be the default. Since nobody else has said anything on this patch besides Bernd, I am going to say yes please. This patch in my mind is the right way

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Put a TARGET_LRA_P into every target

On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 12:03 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 12:26:04PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote: >> On 09/13/2016 12:22 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: >> >This patch adds a TARGET_LRA_P (defined to hook_bool_void_false) to >> >every target

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Put a TARGET_LRA_P into every target

On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 12:26:04PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 09/13/2016 12:22 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > >This patch adds a TARGET_LRA_P (defined to hook_bool_void_false) to > >every target that didn't yet override the hook. No functional change. > > This patch series makes very

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Put a TARGET_LRA_P into every target

On 09/13/2016 12:22 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: This patch adds a TARGET_LRA_P (defined to hook_bool_void_false) to every target that didn't yet override the hook. No functional change. This patch series makes very little sense to me. Adding 35 new instances of a hook definition so you can