On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 5:16 PM, Joseph S. Myers <jos...@codesourcery.com> wrote: > On Thu, 14 Nov 2013, Diego Novillo wrote: > >> This patch contains the mechanical side-effects from >> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg01663.html > > There are rather a lot of "Include tm.h" changes here - especially in > front ends, where we've tried to eliminate tm.h calls, and put comments on > some of those remaining saying exactly what target macros are used to make > clear what's needed to eliminate them. Putting in these includes, without > clear comments explaining how to eliminate them, seems a step backwards.
These are due to builtins.h. The structs defined in there need FIRST_PSEUDO_REGISTER. This means that we have parts of builtins.h that are OK for FEs and others that aren't. This is not good. The best alternative for this change is to leave the declarations for builtins.h inside tree.h and then decide what to do about builtins.h itself. We clearly need it to declare everything related to builtins, but from what you're stating about tm.h, we will need to have an FE variant and an ME/BE variant? Diego.
