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 commit the following (yes I'm s
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.
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.
> > * doc/tm.texi: Regenerate.
>
> "returns a
> "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
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 former is how we'd say it in
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 p
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 fo
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 stron
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 (TARGET_LRA_P): New macro, defin
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 am
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 going to say yes ple
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 encour
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 plea
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 n
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
fo
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 that didn't yet override the ho
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 littl
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
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 (TARGET_LRA_P): New macro, defined to
hook_bool_void_false.
* config
19 matches
Mail list logo
