From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 92475 invoked by alias); 13 Sep 2016 14:27:12 -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 92462 invoked by uid 89); 13 Sep 2016 14:27:11 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=HX-Envelope-From:sk:pinskia, five X-HELO: mail-lf0-f50.google.com Received: from mail-lf0-f50.google.com (HELO mail-lf0-f50.google.com) (209.85.215.50) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 13 Sep 2016 14:27:01 +0000 Received: by mail-lf0-f50.google.com with SMTP id h127so111651486lfh.0 for ; Tue, 13 Sep 2016 07:27:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Qw1Do6BcFm7Gsn7Pvyn5reS1KX6oTOPtYzFWgMOWR1w=; b=mQvhThnhE3vwgxiCwwkVIq26dY04u9vVCqGepfWyvCoHna9DohZY705eOutdjayks/ fzbIQIkEh0yeRbAfv+4QupUJWMfGCyQg3JkcyZMwV+48PQoZFyDOtFBzcejFykkeXmhQ wkaa3p70IO29CK9xcVYpkxFEA8Vg0jz9eXe476Q8cV/FMtunmzQojsL+EetHQpIpfxeQ XW8f6bYajbunuh6olVBzS8izQjmnWHJ5YKvlC+omFAydK1T7VbTp/okKc8+iXgUKalfD HxJCLFZ6K2cKfCnYibfpChCVe0nH1BYAuDD15sH10UIjiIALebtaG3qGwkik88wHhY+b Zq6Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwMngIOj/hWx5IsZxIfHNsTgeBkjxbOUdUBJTS1ZXsGk9sr8d1BdavsOy9gVwtzTELUQwuXCMu/3zrSfsQ== X-Received: by 10.25.43.208 with SMTP id r199mr3225584lfr.140.1473776819126; Tue, 13 Sep 2016 07:26:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.25.166.76 with HTTP; Tue, 13 Sep 2016 07:26:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20160913110349.GA18438@gate.crashing.org> References: <20160913110349.GA18438@gate.crashing.org> From: Andrew Pinski Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 14:27:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Put a TARGET_LRA_P into every target To: Segher Boessenkool Cc: Bernd Schmidt , GCC Patches Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-09/txt/msg00734.txt.bz2 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 hook. No functional change. >> >> This patch series makes very little sense to me. Adding 35 new instances >> of a hook definition so you can delete four others? > > No, the purpose is to default to LRA instead of reload. Everything should > switch to LRA eventually, so over time we need to define the macro in fewer > and fewer targets, until one day whatever remains can all be ripped out. > > 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). > > 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 forward. In the same new ports should not be cc0 ports (though I know some folks try that every once in a while). Thanks, Andrew > > Wrt "delete only four"... There are five or six or so more that use LRA, > but those can all be switched to use old reload instead. Some day that > will be turned off, too. > > > Segher