On 10/05/2018 12:40 PM, Peter Bergner wrote:
On 10/4/18 3:01 PM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
IMHO, the name copy_insn_p is too common and confusing (we already have
functions copy_insn and copy_insn_1 in GCC). The name does not reflect its
result meaning. I would call it something like non_conflict_copy_source_reg
although it is long.
I'm fine with renaming it. I'm not sure I like the use of source reg in
the name even though it is what is returned. That is just a convenience for
the caller of the function. Its true purpose is recognizing whether INSN
is or is not a reg to reg copy for which we can ignore their interference.
OK.
How about is_reg_copy_insn_p() or is_reg_to_reg_copy_p() or ???
Personally I like the first name more. But it is up to you. I don't
want to bother you anymore.
Also I would rename last_regno to bound_regno because it is better reflect
variable value meaning or at least to end_regno as it is a value of END_REGNO
macro.
Ok, I went with end_regno, since that seems to be used elsewhere.
Great.
Thank you, Peter.
