From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 901023858C27 for ; Fri, 30 Jun 2023 16:38:15 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 901023858C27 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1688143095; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=gqsn55ZcT0FFeF+yy1UHR2C+io9QfhnzKQFeYFpRJfY=; b=Pol6jETZjf00PHRDk0nQEO2ZYiM8JwCzzgalkufYm1UoVidZUu8qD4YkIwVJp34EfsmUeK IloxQhu9JvBYhpB0YhrBgq3cMbBG1WoC4+nb4czx6H3Fncv9eJYyErl3IG/8ZhbQRonXnF Jk8SWmSczR3edYIMVNXsgHy++zd3asw= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mx3-rdu2.redhat.com [66.187.233.73]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-596-ugMdbjgrMwe4-QmUYg95OQ-1; Fri, 30 Jun 2023 12:38:07 -0400 X-MC-Unique: ugMdbjgrMwe4-QmUYg95OQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 156B63C100CA; Fri, 30 Jun 2023 16:38:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (unknown [10.45.224.167]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 69D3C2166B2D; Fri, 30 Jun 2023 16:38:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.17.1/8.17.1) with ESMTPS id 35UGc273059070 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 30 Jun 2023 18:38:03 +0200 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.17.1/8.17.1/Submit) id 35UGc0Ml059069; Fri, 30 Jun 2023 18:38:00 +0200 Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2023 18:37:59 +0200 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Kito Cheng Cc: Thomas Schwinge , Richard Biener , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, pan2.li@intel.com, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer , juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai, yanzhang.wang@intel.com, jeffreyalaw@gmail.com, richard.sandiford@arm.com Subject: Re: Adjust LTO mode tables for "Machine_Mode: Extend machine_mode from 8 to 16 bits" (was: [PATCH] Machine_Mode: Extend machine_mode from 8 to 16 bits) Message-ID: Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <20230512050016.476110-1-pan2.li@intel.com> <2CEAD79B-D664-41B4-A337-5E77ECFB2F9D@gmail.com> <87o7kxuq9s.fsf@euler.schwinge.homeip.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.6 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 08:45:38PM +0800, Kito Cheng wrote: > Hmmm, I think maybe what we need is to leverage C++ language features > to declare enum with underlying types like that: > > enum machine_mode : uint16_t What would be the advantage of doing that? I mean, on most hosts using unsigned rather than unsigned short is actually faster, and for the cases where we care about the size (e.g. mode in RTL, DECLs and the like) we already use enum bitfields. Jakub