On 01/05/15 15:06, Oleg Endo wrote:
Though I think further patches of this nature should
probably wait until stage1 reopens.
Also for non-functional stuff like changing more return values / args
from int to bool where it's obvious?
Yea, we're supposed to be locking things down in preparation
On Mon, 2015-01-05 at 12:48 -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 01/03/15 05:18, Oleg Endo wrote:
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-12/msg01730.html
> >
> > On Sun, 2014-12-21 at 23:02 +0100, Oleg Endo wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> It seems that quite some callers of refers_to_regno_p are interested i
On 01/03/15 05:18, Oleg Endo wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-12/msg01730.html
On Sun, 2014-12-21 at 23:02 +0100, Oleg Endo wrote:
Hi,
It seems that quite some callers of refers_to_regno_p are interested in
testing a single register number only. The caller code can be
simplified
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-12/msg01730.html
On Sun, 2014-12-21 at 23:02 +0100, Oleg Endo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It seems that quite some callers of refers_to_regno_p are interested in
> testing a single register number only. The caller code can be
> simplified by adding an overload for re
Hi,
It seems that quite some callers of refers_to_regno_p are interested in
testing a single register number only. The caller code can be
simplified by adding an overload for refers_to_regno_p. This is what
the patch does. No functional changes. Tested with 'make all-gcc' on
sh-elf cross confi
