This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC 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]

Re: [PATCH/RFC] Fix PR optimization/15100


amylaar@spamcop.net (Joern Rennecke) wrote:
>> +	      /* Don't add the dangling REG_RETVAL note.  */
>> +	      else if (! tem)
>> +		place = 0;
>>  	    }
>> 
> 
> If there is a REG_LIBCALL note, it should contain an instruction with a
> REG_RETVAL note, and vice versa.  AFAICT we should just abort when tem
> is 0.  Of course that begs the question why the inconsistency appears
> initially  and how to fix it.

Ugh.  I've checked it in already on mainline according to the approval
in http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-05/msg00647.html.
I must confess that now the problem is beyond me.

Regards,
	kaz


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]