Re: [patch i386]: Sibcall tail-call improvement and partial fix PR/60104

[Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>]

On 09/15/14 05:25, FX wrote:
> > Perhaps it would be safer simply to revert that hunk of the original patch unless/until (1) and (2) above are addressed?
>
> Given that the original patch addresses âonlyâ a missed-optimization (and causes ice-on-valid), it makes sense to me.
What I think we need is folks with an understanding of those systems to 
chime in with the information Kai needs to fix the problem.  I don't 
recall seeing that, so if I missed it, feel free to point me to it.

I'd rather not start going backwards and reverting because we simply 
haven't done the digging to really understand the issues on other other 
ports.

jeff