On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 08:36:35AM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote: > This is a cleanup requested by Segher in a previous review. Most > uses of rs6000_pcrel_p are called for the current function. A > specialized version for cfun is more efficient for these uses.
Then rename that one to rs6000_function_pcrel_p or similar? People will keep trying to use the shorter name otherwise ;-) > (Actually all uses are called for the current function, so now > rs6000_pcrel_p is an orphan. However, I think it's worth keeping > around in case we have a late discovery where we need it.) (Heck, you could even use that short name for the cfun one, if you want. Sorry i didn't think of that before.) Okay for trunk with or without such further changes. Thanks! Segher
