This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Fix sdbout.c bootstrap breakage [was Re: For backend maintainers: changes for C++ compatibility]
- From: Dave Korn <dave dot korn dot cygwin at googlemail dot com>
- To: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>
- Cc: Dave Korn <dave dot korn dot cygwin at googlemail dot com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 03:01:02 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix sdbout.c bootstrap breakage [was Re: For backend maintainers: changes for C++ compatibility]
- References: <m3skk3f1wx.fsf@google.com> <49EE05C2.2020607@gmail.com> <m3mya9c239.fsf@google.com>
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Dave Korn <dave.korn.cygwin@googlemail.com> writes:
>
>> Indeed, I think the arguments to eliminate_regs in sdbout.c probably won't
>> be wrapped in mems, but I didn't quite want to say this was obvious because
>> maybe there's something I didn't consider with passed-in-memory args. Is this
>> correct? It certainly lets my bootstrap get past stage 2.
>
> Since VOIDmode has the value 0, changing 0 to VOIDmode will not change
> the compiler's behaviour.
:) I knew I was doing that, but I didn't want to miss the opportunity to
consider whether the value 0 was the right value to be passing in this
context, while we (transiently) have a warning drawing our attention to it.
> * sdbout.c (sdbout_symbol): Pass VOIDmode to eliminate_regs.
>> (sdbout_parms): Likewise.
>
> This is OK.
Thanks, applied.
cheers,
DaveK