Chung-Ju Wu writes:
> + push_p ? false : true,
Minor nit, but I think the normal GCC style would be to use !push_p here.
Thanks for your patience in dealing with all my comments. All three
subparts look good to me with the change above and the on
Chung-Ju Wu writes:
> On 10/6/13 5:36 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> Thanks for the updates.
>>
>> Chung-Ju Wu writes:
>>>
>>> Now we remove all "use"s and "clobber"s from parallel rtx and
>>> use predicate function to check stack push/pop operation.
>>> Furthermore, once I remove unspec rtx as
Thanks for the updates.
Chung-Ju Wu writes:
> On 9/29/13 7:25 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> Chung-Ju Wu writes:
>>
>>> + /* We need to provide a customized rtx which contains
>>> + necessary information for data analysis,
>>> + so we create a parallel rtx like this:
>>> + (parall
Chung-Ju Wu writes:
>>> +/* Permitting tail calls. */
>>> +
>>> +static bool
>>> +nds32_warn_func_return (tree decl)
>>> +{
>>> + /* Naked functions are implemented entirely in assembly, including the
>>> + return sequence, so suppress warnings about this. */
>>> + return !nds32_naked_func
Chung-Ju Wu writes:
> It has been a while since last v2 patch.
> I create a new v3 patch to fix some typo and indentation.
I had a read through out of curiosity, and FWIW, it looks very clean and
well-commented to me. See below for a few questions and comments.
This isn't an official review thou
On Wed, 24 Jul 2013, Chung-Ju Wu wrote:
> We removed the fancy comment formatting as you suggested.
> However, for the comments like:
>
> /* = */
> /* Title of section */
> /* = */
>
> /* Title of subsection 1 */
>
> /* Title of subsection 2 */
>
> I wis
On Mon, 8 Jul 2013, Chung-Ju Wu wrote:
> +/*
> */
> +
> +/*++*
> + *||*
> + *| T
