On 11/04/2014 12:57 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 11/04/2014 06:56 PM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
On 11/04/2014 12:25 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 11/04/2014 05:28 PM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
+ bool
+ default_can_compare_and_swap_p (machine_mode mode, bool allow_libcall)
+ {
+ return can_compare_and_swap_p (mode, allow_libcall);
+ }
This is silly. I think the problem you point out can be better fixed by moving
the can_compare_and_swap_p prototype elsewhere.
yeah, except it uses some of the optab table stuff that is static to
optabs.c... so the basic functionality remains there.
I said move the prototype. Of course the implementation remains where it is.
prototype is in optabs.h where it belongs since its defined in
optabs.c. :-)
I'm not sure why this is much different than something like the targhook
for builtin_support_vector_misalignment(), other than we are calling the
routine in optabs.c rather than putting the actual code in targhooks.c.
from targhooks.c:
bool
default_builtin_support_vector_misalignment (machine_mode mode,
const_tree type, <...>)
{
if (optab_handler (movmisalign_optab, mode) != CODE_FOR_nothing)
return true;
return false;
}
the idea is to move all the functionality that front ends need into well
defined and controlled places so we can increase the separation. "can
perform a compare_and_swap operation" is clearly a target specific
question isn't it?
Andrew
