Re: Commit: RL78: Include tree-pass.h

[Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com>]

On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 7:11 AM, Richard Guenther
<richard.guenther@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 7:03 AM, Richard Guenther
>> <richard.guenther@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't think we really want that (machine dependent passes).  It seems
>>> we cannot get away with it (so we have mdreorg).  Allowing (some) flexibility
>>> where to put mdreorg is ok, using two different mechanisms (mdreorg and
>>> a "plugin") sounds odd and is IMHO bad for consistency.
>>
>> I think we definitely want machine dependent passes.  E.g., reg-stack
>> should be one.  The passes should live by normal rules, they shouldn't
>> be like mdreorg.
>
> What is "like mdreorg"?  That it is a pass centrally registered,
> called "mdreorg"
> that calls a target hook which happens to implement the pass?  regstack
> is controlled by a target macro and is centrally registered, too.
>
>> I don't really care about the mechanism as long as it exists.
>
> I was suggesting to for example register a 2nd mdreorg-like pass and
> add a 2nd target hook.  regstack should get the same treatment.

If the mechanism is a proliferation of mdreorg passes in every place
we want a target-specific pass, that is fine with me.

Ian