On 13 January 2015 at 15:34, Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de> wrote: > On Sun, 11 Jan 2015, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > >> Hi, >> This is a revamped expr.h flattening flattening patch rebased on >> tree.h and tree-core.h flattening patch (r219402). >> It depends upon the following patch to get committed. >> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-01/msg00565.html >> >> Changes: >> * Removed all includes except tree-core.h. Put includes required by >> expr.h in a comment. >> * Moved stmt.c, expmed.c prototypes to stmt.h, expmed.h respectively. >> * Adjusted generator programs: genemit.c, gengtype.c, genopinit.c, >> genoutput.c. >> * Did not put includes in gcc-plugin.h since expr.h cannot be included >> by plugins >> (putting them broke building a file in c-family/ since expr.h is not >> allowed in front-ends) >> * Affects java front-end (expr.h is allowed in java front-end). >> >> Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu with languages: >> all,go,ada,jit >> Built on all targets in config-list.mk with languages: all, go. >> OK to commit ? > > diff --git a/gcc/expr.c b/gcc/expr.c > index fc22862..824541e 100644 > --- a/gcc/expr.c > +++ b/gcc/expr.c > @@ -41,11 +41,17 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. If not see > #include "regs.h" > #include "hard-reg-set.h" > #include "except.h" > -#include "input.h" > #include "function.h" > #include "insn-config.h" > #include "insn-attr.h" > /* Include expr.h after insn-config.h so we get HAVE_conditional_move. > */ > +#include "hashtab.h" > +#include "emit-rtl.h" > +#include "expmed.h" > +#include "stmt.h" > +#include "statistics.h" > +#include "real.h" > +#include "fixed-value.h" > #include "expr.h" > > Please move the comment to the proper place ah, my flattening tool doesn't look at comments. I will move the comment before expr.h include, thanks. > > diff --git a/gcc/expr.h b/gcc/expr.h > index a7638b8..f1be8dc 100644 > --- a/gcc/expr.h > +++ b/gcc/expr.h > @@ -20,7 +20,8 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. If not see > #ifndef GCC_EXPR_H > #define GCC_EXPR_H > > -/* For inhibit_defer_pop */ > +/* expr.h required includes */ > +#if 0 > #include "hashtab.h" > #include "hash-set.h" > #include "vec.h" > @@ -29,15 +30,17 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. If not see > #include "hard-reg-set.h" > #include "input.h" > #include "function.h" > -/* For XEXP, GEN_INT, rtx_code */ > #include "rtl.h" > -/* For optimize_size */ > #include "flags.h" > -/* For tree_fits_[su]hwi_p, tree_to_[su]hwi, fold_convert, size_binop, > - ssize_int, TREE_CODE, TYPE_SIZE, int_size_in_bytes, */ > #include "tree-core.h" > -/* For GET_MODE_BITSIZE, word_mode */ > #include "insn-config.h" > +#include "alias.h" > +#include "emit-rtl.h" > +#include "expmed.h" > +#include "stmt.h" > +#endif > > Err, please remove the #if 0 section I kept it because if something breaks later (hopefully not!), it will be easier to fix. I will remove it. > > + > +#include "tree-core.h" > > Why? The original comment says > > -/* For tree_fits_[su]hwi_p, tree_to_[su]hwi, fold_convert, size_binop, > - ssize_int, TREE_CODE, TYPE_SIZE, int_size_in_bytes, */ > > but all those are declared in tree.h. Which means the files including > expr.h must already include tree.h. > > If that's not the reason we need to include tree-core.h from expr.c > please add a comment explaining why. bt-load.c fails to compile because it includes expr.h but does not include tree.h I will place tree.h include in all files that include expr.h and rebuild. > > -/* Definitions from emit-rtl.c */ > -#include "emit-rtl.h" > - > /* Return a memory reference like MEMREF, but with its mode widened to > MODE and adjusted by OFFSET. */ > extern rtx widen_memory_access (rtx, machine_mode, HOST_WIDE_INT); > > err - functions defined in emit-rtl.c should be declared in emit-rtl.h. > Please fix that first. expr.h should _only_ contain prototypes > for stuff defined in expr.c. oops, missed it :( > > Andrew did a good job with this, first cleaning up a header moving > declarations to proper places and only after that flattening it. > > The rest of the patch looks good to me but expr.h isn't in a good > shape after it. I will work on it and send patch with suggested changes by tomorrow.
Thanks, Prathamesh > > Thanks, > Richard.
