On 14.06.23 10:42, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> Couldn't/shouldn't we now get rid of this 'GOMP_MAP_FLAG_PRESENT'...
...
>>   #define GOMP_MAP_PRESENT_P(X) \
>> -  (((X) & GOMP_MAP_FLAG_PRESENT) == GOMP_MAP_FLAG_PRESENT)
>> +  (((X) & GOMP_MAP_FLAG_PRESENT) == GOMP_MAP_FLAG_PRESENT \
>> +   || (X) == GOMP_MAP_FORCE_PRESENT)
> ..., and this 'GOMP_MAP_PRESENT_P' should look for
> 'GOMP_MAP_FLAG_ALWAYS_PRESENT' instead of 'GOMP_MAP_FLAG_PRESENT' (plus
> 'GOMP_MAP_FORCE_PRESENT')?
>
> Instead of the current effective 'GOMP_MAP_FLAG_ALWAYS_PRESENT':
>
>      GOMP_MAP_FLAG_SPECIAL_0
>      | GOMP_MAP_FLAG_SPECIAL_2
>      | GOMP_MAP_FLAG_SPECIAL_5
>
> ..., it could/should use a simpler flag combination?  (My idea is that
> this later make usage of flag bits for other purposes easier -- but I've
> not verified that in depth.)

I concur that it would be useful to save that space. We do not fully
rule out other combinations as we can always move to check single values
instead of comparing bit patterns, but I concur, reserving flags would
be useful.

Can you propose some bit pattern to use? Attached are the currently used
ones (binary, hex, and decimal).

Tobias
-----------------
Siemens Electronic Design Automation GmbH; Anschrift: Arnulfstraße 201, 80634 München; Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung; Geschäftsführer: Thomas Heurung, Frank Thürauf; Sitz der Gesellschaft: München; Registergericht München, HRB 106955