From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16332 invoked by alias); 18 Jul 2013 16:25:27 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 16305 invoked by uid 89); 18 Jul 2013 16:25:26 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-7.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL,RDNS_NONE,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.1 Received: from Unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Thu, 18 Jul 2013 16:25:26 +0000 Received: from int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.25]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r6IGPJ70008266 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 18 Jul 2013 12:25:19 -0400 Received: from stumpy.slc.redhat.com (ovpn-113-168.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.168]) by int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r6IGPIvr028527; Thu, 18 Jul 2013 12:25:19 -0400 Message-ID: <51E816EE.6050504@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 16:25:00 -0000 From: Jeff Law User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Malcolm CC: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] Introduce NEXT_PASS_NUM macro References: <1374110303-9758-1-git-send-email-dmalcolm@redhat.com> <1374110303-9758-4-git-send-email-dmalcolm@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <1374110303-9758-4-git-send-email-dmalcolm@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2013-07/txt/msg00724.txt.bz2 On 07/17/2013 07:18 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > gcc/ > > Explicitly number the instances of passes within passes.def. > > This is needed by a subsequent patch so that we can create > fields within the pipeline class for each pass instance (to help > locate pass instances when debugging). > > * passes.c (NEXT_PASS_NUM): Define. > > * passes.def (NEXT_PASS, NEXT_PASS_NUM): Replace uses of > NEXT_PASS on passes that have multiple instances with uses of > NEXT_PASS_NUM. So this means we have to track down the instance number if we add a duplicate pass in the pipeline. I can see positives and negatives of doing that. I'll go along as I'm a proponent of the goal of having the passes be a first class object. Ok for the trunk. Jeff