On 3/12/19 2:50 PM, Eric Gallager wrote: > On 3/12/19, Martin Liška <mli...@suse.cz> wrote: >> Hi. >> >> I've thinking about the file split about quite some time, mainly >> in context of PR84402. I would like to discuss if it's fine for >> maintainers of the target to make such split and into which logical >> components can the file be split? >> >> I'm suggesting something like: >> - option-related and attribute-related stuff (i386-options.c - as seen in >> patch) >> - built-in related functions >> - expansion/gen functions - still quite of lot of functions, would make >> sense to split into: >> - scalar >> - vector >> - prologue/epilogue, GOT, PLT, symbol emission >> - misc extensions like STV, TLS, CET, retpolines, multiversioning, .. >> - helpers - commonly used functions, print_reg, ix86_print_operand, .. >> >> I am volunteering to make the split, hopefully early in the next stage1. >> >> Thoughts? >> >> Thanks, >> Martin >> > > I'm not a maintainer, but just as an onlooker I highly support this > move; i386.c is way too long as it is. 7 pieces sounds like a good > number of new files to split it into, too. I trust your judgment on where/how to split and fully support the goals behind splitting. Uros is the key person you need to get on board.
jeff