> Ping. Is it ok for x86 maintainer? I tought I already approved the x86 bits. > > Thanks, > Wei Mi. > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Wei Mi <w...@google.com> wrote: > >> Go ahead and consider that pre-approved. Just send it to the list with a > >> note that I approved it in this thread. > >> > >> Jeff > > > > Thanks! The new patch addressed Jeff's comments. > > > > Is it ok for x86 maintainer? > > > > Thanks, > > Wei Mi. > > > > 2013-10-16 Wei Mi <w...@google.com> > > > > * gcc/config/i386/i386.c (memory_address_length): Extract a part > > of code to rip_relative_addr_p. > > (rip_relative_addr_p): New Function. > > (ix86_macro_fusion_p): Ditto. > > (ix86_macro_fusion_pair_p): Ditto. > > * gcc/config/i386/i386.h: Add new tune features about macro-fusion. > > * gcc/config/i386/x86-tune.def (DEF_TUNE): Ditto. > > * gcc/doc/tm.texi: Generated. > > * gcc/doc/tm.texi.in: Ditto. > > * gcc/haifa-sched.c (try_group_insn): New Function. > > (group_insns_for_macro_fusion): Ditto. > > (sched_init): Call group_insns_for_macro_fusion. > > * gcc/target.def: Add two hooks: macro_fusion_p and > > macro_fusion_pair_p. > > The i386 bits are OK.
Honza
