On 05/03/2012 05:59 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
the type can be removed from the structure and now there would be no
wastage. Is that reasonable?
types in ops is a bad idea (tried that once - heh), it wrecks too much generic
code.
heh, no doubt. As I Iooked at handling the generic atomics, looks like
Im going to restructure it anyway a bit, and it will actually match what
you were looking for in the first place. the generic functions deal
with slabs of memory, so instead of a LHS, they pass in a pointer for
the result. as well as any other values like the RHS expression value.
so now I expect to see something more along the lines of
gimple_atomic_base { kind, order }
gimple_atomic_target_base : gimple_atomic_base { type, target }
gimple_atomic : gimple_atomic_target_base { ops[] }
gimple_atomic_generic : gimple_atomic_target_base { return_val; ops[] }
so FENCEs will be gimple_atomic_base,
all the rest of the normal ones will be gimple_atomic
and the generi oness will be gimple_atomic_generic
or something like that. It aint working yet so it isnt in stone and
those are just preliminary names, but it will have a proper hierarchy of
some sort. :-)
Andrew
