This is the mail archive of the binutils@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the binutils project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
>This looks OK, though I think you are trying to be too clever in a few >places. > >For instance, in check_pending_save, you have >+ else >+ cur = (prev = cur)->next; >You are trying too hard to avoid using braces here. > >In 5 different places, you have inside a loop >+ mask &= ~(mask & (~mask + 1)); >+ if (!mask) >+ return ptr; >+ cur = alloc_record (fr_mem); >+ cur->r.record.p.frmask = mask; >+ prev->r.record.p.frmask ^= mask; >I understand why you wrote it that way, but I don't think you can safely >expect that everyone looking at this code in the next 20 years will >understand it. There should be comments explaining what it is doing. >First you clear off the low order bit of mask. Then you xor it into >prev frmask so that prev frmask is left with only the low order bit. >Then you repeat until no bits are left. Jim, I'm just unsure, did your (above) reply mean once adjusted I can commit the patch (as posted to the ml a week ago), or do I have to wait for another approval in such a case? Jan
Attachment:
binutils-mainline-ia64-unwind-spill-mask.patch
Description: Text document
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |